117
YouTube has now begun skipping videos altogether for users with ad blockers
(www.androidpolice.com)
We need a publicly funded video hosting service like PBS.
this post was submitted on 28 May 2024
117 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
1084 readers
10 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
Good luck getting that through the system… the cost to run something like YouTube is… well, let’s just say the lack of real competitions speaks volumes.
The biggest drain is the copyright fights, I'm guessing. Defending against and pleasing every big company with an interest.
That’s a drop in the pond in the grand scheme of things. You just out source that out to rights management companies and absolve yourself from that obligation behind safe harbour. This is basically what they’re doing in this department. They’ve built Content ID for digital finger printing, and then invented an entire market for rights management companies on both sides of the equation.
On the other hand, 500 hours of video footage got uploaded to YouTube every minute per YouTube in 2022 (pdf warning). 30 minutes of video game content (compresses better), just the 720p variant using avc1 codec is about 443MB of space. Never mind all the other transcodes or higher bitrates. So say 800MB per hour of 720p content; 500 hours of content per minute means 400GB of disk space requirement, per minute; 500TB of disk space per day.
That’s just video uploaded to YouTube. I don’t even know how much is being watched regularly, but even if we assume at least one view per video, that’s 500TB of bandwidth in and then 500TB of bandwidth out per day.
Good luck scaling that on public budget.
Extrapolating from this, we can say that Youtube hosts around 2.5 to 3 exabytes (2.5 to 3 million terabytes) of data. Interestingly, the total volume of data on the internet is, as of the end of 2023, around 120 zettabytes, so Youtube only makes up around 0.0025% of the total volume of all that data.
Most of the remaining space is used by porn obviously...
No, it’s a picture of your mum, cos she’s so fat. I’m sorry
Yes, the state is subservient to capital.
You say that like they even look at them. That's clearly not the case.
Of course they dont. Not a chance with that much video added every hour. Also everything gotta be automated. And in favor of those who can make the most legal trouble. And thats companies, not the many various smaller IP-owners.
Just rubs me the wrong way that only Google are finding this business worth it. None of the other companies, even with massive amounts of storage and cdn infrastructure, are able to compete for long.
China did it...https://www.youku.tv/ probably the EU could do it too, if it cared about owning its own critical infrastructure.
Japan has nicovideo.jp as well. Russia has Yandex Efir (gone through a couple rebrands, Efir was the name in 2020 when we were discussing deals; it was operating under another name prior, and I think it is superseded by dzen). Off to the side I think vK also has a small video delivery presence like how Facebook has videos in their feeds. China has several platforms: Tencent Video (owned by Tencent), Youku as you’ve called out (owned by Alibaba), XiGua (ByteDance), Haokan (Baidu), and then slew of smaller ones like KuaiShou, BiliBili and that video thing WeChat tries to push. None of these are public service operated by the State, by the way. List really goes on… and I’d know, because I’ve worked in the space for almost 12 years now.
China’s great firewall aside, all these platforms are tiny in comparison, and in the grand scheme of things, and barely have any reach. In general, these regional are all taking a backseat just like Nebula and alike — if creators’ content are hyperlocal/super niche, they might be okay with smaller regional platforms; but if they’re trying to extend their reach and monetization (to ensure they have money to continue producing content), the creators’ presence on these platforms are really just auxiliary to their primary presence on YouTube.
Getting viewers to these smaller platforms is going to pose a significant chicken or the egg problem — creators aren’t incentivized to be there because lack of viewer, viewers aren’t incentivized to go there because lack of content. Worse yet, I’ve also seen situations where creators are paid for some period of exclusivity and then when the deal lapses they just go straight back to YouTube.
Real competitors do not exist, and likely will not exist for the foreseeable future. YouTube is the million pound behemoth when everyone else barely registers on the radar.
We have torrent technology, we just need to make it a little more dynamic.
What people need to do is start self-hosting PeerTube IMO.
People refuse to even let an ad play but sure, they'll participate in the pledge drives
Ads are not just inconvenient but very often annoying and misleading, so I can't blame anyone for that.
Micropayment donations might, though. It's not annoying, not misleading, and there is a considerable amount of people even now that regularly donate/otherwise support their favorite content creators, and this would be even more convenient because it is automatic and the amount depends on how much time did you watch videos.
And it doesn't even necessarily depend on cryptocurrencies.
The amount of people who would pay is going to be near zero in the grand scheme of things.
Next time you’re anywhere where you could discretely look at people’s phones, see how many of them run apps with ads. Most apps will offer very cheap IAP to remove ads, but people choose to not pay it. Vast majority of the users have already decided that their time wasted on ads are worth less than whatever tiny monetary cost it would be to remove them. Same thing here: Vast majority of the users have already decided they’re not going to pay to get rid of the ads. This in turn means due to how few people who would be willing to pay, it is not going to be nearly sufficient to keep the infrastructure required up and running, as well as keep the creators compensated for creating the content.
at that point why not just subscribe to yt premium?
That's already a thing, my guy.
What is it?
Its called PBS
Can I freely upload my niché videos of USB cable testing there? PS, I'm not a US citizen.
No
Then how is it a replacement for YouTube?
I haven't experienced any of the problems mentioned in this article while using Firefox + uBO (on Windows, Linux, and Fennec fork on Android), nor while using the Tubular app on Android.
Its likely to be a slow rollout thing. I havent either for what its worth.
I did have a couple of videos fail to play, but they worked on refresh so I assume that was unrelated.
Moving to Albania might solve the problem.
If a YouTube ad installs a virus on my system, can I sue YouTube?
YouTube is the virus
I doubt viewing the ad on YouTube would give you a virus. You’d have to click on the ad, leave YouTube, and at that point google would wash their hands of it and say it’s your fault.
If YouTube takes files from 3rd parties and simply displays them, then viruses are possible. This is more true of ads placed via ad-broker on other websites. To get ad revenue a webmaster provides a space where the ad is inserted. The ad is provided by a 3rd party who pays the ad broker for placement. Neither the webmaster nor the ad broker have any visibility into the content of the ad, which could even contain code (ads which move or present UI elements have code to make those things work)
No, you cannot, because you're the one who chose to disable the adblockers that NIST and/or CISA (can't remember if it's both entities) highly encourage everyone to use.
E: I reread it, and it sounds I'm being mean. I was, in fact, being facetious. I'm on the same mindset as you, and I will sooner not use YouTube than disable antiadware protection.
But I would not have disabled my ad blocker in other circumstances, but YouTube is forcing me to disable it against my better judgment to be able to use the site.
Oh, no, I agree with you. But google doesn't care.
Sure! There's zero likelihood of this ever happening, but in the weird universe where it does you can probably sue them for coming around and shaving your dog too.
i don't see why you wouldn't just get premium? it's probably one of the better streaming service platforms since i watch youtube and twitch more than i watch anything on peacock, paramount, etc plus it comes with youtube music
They don't deserve my money, they already harvest enough of my data.
“Why don’t you just bend over and take it!”
No ma’am I don’t think I will. Interesting suggestion though.
In fact the ads are not really a big problem for me (if they're not too much present) but the trackers behind are much more, so what is the point of paying to have the same amount of trackers, most of the time I watch my YouTube creators on privacy focused solution or going to peertube for the rest
Dude, I have YouTube music and I literally am not able to change or upgrade to YouTube premium. They don't let me, it links me to a useless empty page with no options. I don't even know what the price is like. This whole subscription thing is a mess.
I solved it by using YouTube revanced and have all premium functions and more. On desktop I wrote my own player. It's so much better because their website is a mess. At this point do I really want to pay for features I know I won't use?
lol
As much as it pains me to say it, I agree and am annoyed at the amount of "no, fuck Google" in response. I agree, fuck Google, but not because they're charging for a service so good that we all use it, fuck Google for its heavy user tracking of paying users. I understand it costs immensely to host the sheer amount of data that they do, and they still allow creators to have a portion of what's made from each video. Don't get me wrong, I'm all about sticking to the man and all that, but to want a website that provides the same service without any costs involved is unreasonable. Peertube is the closest solution we see, and there are still costs involved for anyone hosting a server. I hate that YouTube is our only real option and I'd love something different, but they already have all of our content, and ultimately, they're fairly reasonable with their demands (pay for our service or watch our ads). The amount of user tracking they do is what's unacceptable to me, but that's across all of their products, and I would love to see some enforcement of minimum required data.
Most importantly because I don't want to support that wholly unethical company that google is, and I think nobody else should. They already have plenty of money, which would be enough, if they wouldn't be a publicly traded company with endless thirst for more and more and more and more.