3 ms·

The point is that people are spoiled and still complaining. A replacement for Google is 15 services that are $9.99/mo or ad-supported with zero tolerance for ad

The point is that people are spoiled and still complaining. A replacement for Google is 15 services that are $9.99/mo or ad-supported with zero tolerance for ad blocking. People are blind to this, they think Google is a charity that got greedy. Meanwhile they haven't let a Google ad through their ad blocker for 15 years.

makeitdouble 1y ago
> A replacement for Google is 15 services that are $9.99/mo or ad-supported with zero tolerance for ad blocking. Youtube Premium is $13.99/mo or you get ads with also zero tolerance for ad blocking. We've already been there for a while wherever Google is serious about it.
- Workaccount2 1y ago
  You can still block yt ads on desktop. I don't think people understand that it would be trivial for Google to block anyone with an ad blocker from accessing any Google domain. And if they did that, cut off the people who use the services but never pay, those people would complain.
  - makeitdouble 1y ago
    It's not consistent but they do block users [0] when adblock is detected. I wonder how it goes internally and what's the actual reason that stops them for doing it full scale, but I've personally got the block so can confirm it's a real thing, and assume they won't be giving it up (of course workarounds also exist) [0] https://www.techspot.com/news/107221-youtube-anti-ad-blocker-measures-causing-problems-browsers.html https://www.techspot.com/news/107221-youtube-anti-ad-blocker...
  - nobody9999 1y ago
    >I don't think people understand that it would be trivial for Google to block anyone with an ad blocker from accessing any Google domain. And little of value would be lost.
kergonath 1y ago
> The point is that people are spoiled and still complaining. No. Google is making money, it is not a charity. More than that, they do everything they can to obfuscate that fact and brainwash us into thinking we just get it for free thanks to their generosity. It is not the case at all. All these services are data funnels for the actual main business of Google, which is to sell ads. If they make money off our backs, it is not unreasonable to have some expectations.

makeitdouble 1y ago

> A replacement for Google is 15 services that are $9.99/mo or ad-supported with zero tolerance for ad blocking. Youtube Premium is $13.99/mo or you get ads with also zero tolerance for ad blocking. We've already been there for a while wherever Google is serious about it.

Workaccount2 1y ago
You can still block yt ads on desktop. I don't think people understand that it would be trivial for Google to block anyone with an ad blocker from accessing any Google domain. And if they did that, cut off the people who use the services but never pay, those people would complain.
- makeitdouble 1y ago
  It's not consistent but they do block users [0] when adblock is detected. I wonder how it goes internally and what's the actual reason that stops them for doing it full scale, but I've personally got the block so can confirm it's a real thing, and assume they won't be giving it up (of course workarounds also exist) [0] https://www.techspot.com/news/107221-youtube-anti-ad-blocker-measures-causing-problems-browsers.html https://www.techspot.com/news/107221-youtube-anti-ad-blocker...
- nobody9999 1y ago
  >I don't think people understand that it would be trivial for Google to block anyone with an ad blocker from accessing any Google domain. And little of value would be lost.

kergonath 1y ago

> The point is that people are spoiled and still complaining. No. Google is making money, it is not a charity. More than that, they do everything they can to obfuscate that fact and brainwash us into thinking we just get it for free thanks to their generosity. It is not the case at all. All these services are data funnels for the actual main business of Google, which is to sell ads. If they make money off our backs, it is not unreasonable to have some expectations.