this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2024
241 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

1083 readers
7 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth 9 points 7 months ago (6 children)

You could just pay for premium. Then you wouldn’t have ads

[–] inetknght@lemmy.ml 45 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

OTA TV: with ads

OTA TV: if you record you are pirating

Cable TV: you pay a fortune to have no ads!

Cable TV: now with extra premium stuff!

Cable TV: now with ads!

Cable TV: if you record, you'll be prosecuted

Cable TV: pray we do not alter the deal further

Cable TV: why is everyone moving away from Cable TV?

Youtube: your own videos!

Youtube: your own videos are actually ours

Youtube: our videos with ads!

Youtube: now pay a fortune to remove ads!

Youtube: pray we do not alter the deal further

Youtube: if you download or remove ads you'll be banned

This isn't the pattern you're looking for. Move along.

[–] NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Oh, we’ll see at that point I would just like stop paying for it. That’s how I deal with services that no longer meet my expectations.

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 9 points 7 months ago (1 children)

That's exactly what people are doing.

[–] NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Kind of, people are not quitting YouTube, I’m off them are still using it, but bitching that their free video streaming service needs to get paid.

They are still using it and costing YouTube money in aggregate

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 12 points 7 months ago (1 children)

They are still using it and costing YouTube money in aggregate

The poor company only making $31.5 Billion a year has to eat the streaming cost for someone using as ad blocker? Won't somebody PLEASE think of the billionaires?!

[–] NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Oh no won’t someone please think of the people so entitled they believe they should get everything for free.

Like, I just don’t understand the thought process behind people like you.

Do you ask for free everything else?

[–] krolden@lemmy.ml 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

how much are you paying for your kbin account?

[–] NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth 2 points 7 months ago

Not one red cent, I also wouldn’t bitch if part of the necessity was to charge or have ads.

I’d rather pay someone else than selfhost

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 13 points 7 months ago

humanity would be better off if google went bankrupt

[–] RandomException@sopuli.xyz 11 points 7 months ago (4 children)

Weird to see this downvoted. Youtube is actually a good service that also isn't cheap to run, and it also pays good(?) money to the people producing popular content on the platform so why not pay for using it? Or, you know, live with the ad infestation. Businesses need money to run, and if you don't pay for the content, then either it's the ads or eventually the whole platform needs to be shut down.

It is a separate discussion if Premium pricing is appropriate etc. But it's quite horrifying to see people around the world having been taught into thinking that everything should be "free" even though at the same time everyone is complaining about privacy violation and ads being everywhere all the time.

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 12 points 7 months ago (1 children)

But it's quite horrifying to see people around the world having been taught into thinking that everything should be "free"

Maybe the businesses shouldn't have created the expectation that everything was "free" then.

YouTube used to be 1 skippable ad at the start of the video. Now it's multiple unskippable ads throughout the video. If the 1 skippable ad wasn't a viable business model then they shouldn't have been pretending it was and then changing things later once people have gotten used to the "free" system.

[–] NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

So you would like a plan that uses the same amount of bandwidth and power as they used back then, with one skippable ad, for free?

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Yup.

YouTube could easily avoid AdBlockers by simply having ad part of the video itself. Not pulling it from a different server, not hijacking your video player to prevent user controls, just part of the video like any other part of the video and AdBlockers would not be able to detect it. They're not going to do that though, because then users won't be forced to watch an ad they have no interest in.

[–] NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Do you realize how low quality your stuff would be?

Then people would bitch that they can’t get the high quality version for free

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Do you realize how low quality your stuff would be?

YouTube makes $30 billion a year. They'll be fine.

Then people would bitch that they can’t get the high quality version for free

Reducing the max resolution for people who aren't on YouTube Red will come next once they stop focusing on AdBlockers.

"Service quality will continue to decrease until profits improve!"

[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

But it’s quite horrifying to see people around the world having been taught into thinking that everything should be “free” even though at the same time everyone is complaining about privacy violation and ads being everywhere all the time.

That is exactly the issue, but you are placing quite a bit too much of your disapproval on the audience.

Google (and others) have built business models off of data mining because so many people didn't give a shit for so long about it. They have monetized their users for the entire time they have owned the platform. They have trained their own users to feel like the product was free while using those people for advertising dollars.

People have always hated ads, but you had generations of folks who were born before the internet who mostly just accepted the ads were going to be there, and also have never given a single thought to privacy. That slice of the pie is getting smaller, for various reasons.

Now Google have decided since they can't reliably exploit enough of their users, it's time to start charging them directly. They are fighting against their own inertia. It is they who have trained users with "we aren't asking you for $$, so don't worry about how we're paying for all this, trust me bro."

The modern audience is increasingly made up of people with both the will and capability to set up ad blocking and/or privacy protecting measures. Sorry Google, we aren't going down quietly.

[–] RandomException@sopuli.xyz 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

You are absolutely right! Part of the horribleness is exactly companies like Google who were the ones teaching people that everything should be "free" as in usable without explicit money transaction, and now they are the ones who are (thanks to EU I guess) trying to revert that and make the business model viable through subscription.

So I do get why the problem exists and I feel no empathy for the companies that are to blame for that. But, I do worry that we have a whole generation of people who think that stuff should just exist and have no monetary value like it just materialized out of thin air without anyone working on it before and neither having to keep it running. That is not a healthy mental model and it will contribute to predatory companies being able to harvest data out of these people in the future meanwhile privacy-first companies can't get them as customers because they have to actually ask for money for their services.

[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 months ago

But, I do worry that we have a whole generation of people who think that stuff should just exist and have no monetary value like it just materialized out of thin air without anyone working on it before and neither having to keep it running. That is not a healthy mental model and it will contribute to predatory companies being able to harvest data out of these people in the future

I see where you are coming from there, and I don't disagree with your opinion, but I do still think that while that may objectively be a mindset that is potentially harmful, I feel the net impact in this context is more likely to be increased contribution to and support of things that really are Free (gratis and libre), nudging reality closer to a place where a lot of those sorts of services are free or donation-supported, and less likely to be in corporate hands unless those corporations improve their behavior.

A hard to summarize version of that sort of path and mindset is what initially pushed me away from Windows, but over more than a decade I've developed lots more reasons than cost for why I'd never go back, and for why I've become a Free Software enthusiast and advocate.

[–] verdigris@lemmy.ml 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Stuff should be free. We live in an age where every one of us could be living a life of comfort and reasonable luxury with a modicum of work. In the meantime those of us who aren't being showered by the excesses of capitalism are fully entitled to stand in the splashes.

[–] RandomException@sopuli.xyz 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Well I mean stuff always has some costs assigned to it. Even if we are talking about Google or software in general, there are still people needed to create and maintain the software itself for the products, who in part also need to put some food on the table and get a roof above their heads. Then there are the infrastructure costs which are enormous on a global video streaming service like Youtube. Now, I do acknowledge that Google engineers are usually insanely well-paid, but that's the way life is when you absolutely need the people working for you. Other companies might choose to cut features while searching for cheaper developers but it is what it is. In the end, nothing is free and you always end up paying for services in a way or another. And I'm not sure if I would like to continue on the "free" services path that we saw in the last 15 years.

[–] NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Is it downvoted? I’m on kbin so I can’t see anything but kbin votes and I have nothing but upvotes. lol

Edit: downloaded to downvoted

[–] monobot@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It is, it has -9 points right now. While unpopular opinion, I agree with it if you like the content.

I use it, but I am trying to move to podcast and other platforms as much as possible.

[–] NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth 1 points 7 months ago

Podcasts have their place in my routine.

[–] mjhelto@lemm.ee 11 points 7 months ago

I'll pass, thanks. Too many streaming platforms already.

[–] Reawake9179@lemmy.kde.social 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

No ads? What is with sponsor #1-#5 planted all over each video?

You're just paying premium for free content, that doesn't go away.

[–] NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

So you are mad at the video creators for putting sponsorships in?

[–] Reawake9179@lemmy.kde.social 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

No, i don't care, because i don't pay anything for it.

They advertise ad-free access, when in fact the ads are in the video themselves.

[–] NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

So you’re upset that they don’t tell you that creators can choose to put sponsorships in?

[–] Reawake9179@lemmy.kde.social 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

I'm not upset at all, if you want it written again.

I don't pay for shit and it will stay that way.

At the meantime ads will get blocked and sponsors will get skipped, i'm not obliged to support anyone and i couldn't care less.

[–] NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth 1 points 7 months ago

OK, have fun not supporting the things that you like?

[–] Lettuceeatlettuce@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 months ago

Lol!! Imagine if xD