716
YouTube intensifies fight against ad blockers showing pop-ups, and users are frustrated | Blocking ad-block users (www.techspot.com)
submitted 2 years ago by [M, B] to c/technology@lemmy.world
282 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

YouTube intensifies fight against ad blockers showing pop-ups, and users are frustrated | Blocking ad-block users::undefined

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 67 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I agree. YouTube can be very useful, but we really ought to be moving to other platforms at this point. Fuck YouTube.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 24 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I’ve been using YouTube far more than any of my paid services for years. However I’m ready for a switch. If the YouTubers who I follow switched platforms I’d go with them in a second.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -7 points 2 years ago (1 child)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Patrion and buying merchandise are the ways I support content creators. I’d rather make sure money goes directly to them and not to some corporation that will seize funds or cut off ad revenue at a whim with no real recourse.

    I understand the economics behind hosting videos, I also don’t use Adblock. YouTube has taken ads and unwanted content to a new level in the last year and they are driving away viewers. I refuse to support them with a subscription.

    If an ethical alternative pops up that has the creators I want I’d be happy to support it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago

    While buying merch, doing patreon, and other forms are commendable - we watch them on YouTube. Id get protesting the platform if they were making money hand over fist but we already know they don't make a profit on the platform. Ads and premium are just methods to staunch the bleeding. I understand the ads are intrusive and are getting worse but they've only amped them up to compensate for users who aren't served ads due to adblockers.

    I don't find it unethical to pay YouTube. They pay creators a fair percentage and overall are taking a loss. It's not greed, it's trying to stay afloat. Whether or not I support their policy changes, I'd like creators to survive off their work.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Problem is hosting all the video. You either have one host or many (P2P). Both have issues.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 16 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    And both cost money, neither can exist if everyone circumvents the methods to make money.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    YouTube defended their monopoly by running for free. They murdered the growth of legitimate competitions like Vimeo that had healthier business models... Because they didn't try to run for free.

    And now that they've saturated the market and killed off all of the serious competition it's time to profit

    Well, frankly, go fuck yourself.

    So long YouTube, and thanks for all the fish. 🐬

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Do you know why there are no good competitors to YouTube? It's fucking expensive.

    They have a monopoly but for what? They don't turn a profit. The losses they take on the platform are public knowledge because shockingly, hosting hundreds of TB of data being uploaded per minute isn't cheap.

    The only sites that even spit in their general direction is like, Pornhub and oh boy don't try to tell me that 'ad experience' is better Lol. Youtube has shit policies and even worse moderator decisions but it is widely a fucking charity and I think they have some right to turn it into a business instead.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    That article is outdated. YouTube started to become profitable, but it took more than a decade to get there, so your point still stands.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I look forward to the updated source you have on hand. They weren't profitable in 2009, weren't profitable in 2015, and the only things to change since then were Premium subscriptions and more ads. What could they have done to turn a profit?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    Typed "was google profitable in 2022". Took about 4 seconds.

    https://ippei.com/is-youtube-still-profitable/

    https://www.businessofapps.com/data/youtube-statistics/

    Edit: as I'm not sure you'll look at the graphs. I want to point out that since 2015 the "what could they have done to turn a profit" question is answered in the graphs

    Users increased about 225%

    Revenue has increased 700-800%

    Its very profitable.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    Revenue

    Unfortunately, revenue and profit are not synonyms. Revenue is money made before taxes and expenses. Yes, their revenue has increased because their userbase has increased. Users who are served advertisements. If users block advertisements, revenue decreases* while expenses increase due to more traffic and data storage required, reducing profit. Since YouTube doesn't flop their dick out on the table often, we don't know exact numbers for expenses but in 2015 when they did whip it out, it was at a loss. In your own link, the only methods it cites for Youtube 'profiting' are advertisements and premium. A userbase is only valuable if you can advertise to them, sell their data, or get them to pay a subscription.

    • Revenue technically doesn't "decrease" in this instance but just fails to "increase" because advertisements aren't being served to users that otherwise would receive them.

    If enough people block ads, it widens the margin between cost and revenue which can lead to "negative profits" or a loss.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    I'm well aware revenue and profit arent 1:1. You're "source" is a "Google person says they break even" in 2015. I give you graphs showing revenue growing at almost 4x the rate of users since 2015. Are they making 800% more profit, obviously not. But they sure as hell aren't losing money on YouTube anymore.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago*

    My guy.. Userbases increases come with increased traffic and the need for more data storage and bandwidth. We not only don't know what their expenses are but we can't even make a good guess. Your "graphs" show revenue. Stop pointing to them like they matter in any sense. They don't.

    800% in REVENUE means nothing if expenses are 805%.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    You literally just proved my point.

    It wasn't profitable. And it was free. It killed competition by losing money.

    And now, by your concession, they are turning it into a business.

    That's a fundamental change in the service. Fuck that. Either it was always their intent, in which case they were lying scum the whole time. Or it wasn't their intent and they've just decided spontaneously to prioritize profit, in which case it's greed and betrayal.

    Either way, fuck 'em.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago

    .. Yes. The strategy of expanding at a loss in order to recoup it later is a... business strategy. What? It's not even an underhanded one because it carries substantial risk. They ate losses and are now trying to collect on what users like you and I have been enjoying on their dime. Adblockers was to staunch the bleeding and clearly it's not working well enough so they're trying new ways.

    You're confusing greed with typical business practices. The grocery store isn't greedy, they're trying to keep the lights on and pay employees. This isn't "Walmart selling items at a loss until local businesses shut down and ramping them back up afterwards" - the data storage needed for this shit is beyond what most companies can do. Amazon with their AWS infrastructure is the only thing that has a shot in hell. The only reason Youtube can do it is by the sheer fact rich ass Google owns them.

    Businesses typically collect this thing called money to keep supplying the service you enjoy. Adblockers remove the very essential part of this exchange in which you pay for the thing you're using. You've been stealing groceries and are mad you're now being told to pay for them.

    My confusion is profound.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent