• makyo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      111
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Right? Firefox has been excellent for some time now, and Google has actively betrayed user's trust for at least as long. It's easy to switch and Firefox almost always has equivalent plugins and other solutions. There's very little reason not to switch.

    • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      75
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      This is not a chrome vs firefox issue. People using an adblocker on firefox are getting blocked just the same.

      See:

      source (sorry for the reddit link)

      • Azzu@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        43
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Most often this happens because the user runs some other addon/blocker that interferes with ublock (or gets detected). It's important to test with only ublock active and see if the problem persists, and if not, to slowly enable more and more to see what is causing the issues.

        • Kedly@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          22
          ·
          1 year ago

          For me there was about a day where google was winning against ublock even if I was onoy using Ublock. Now though Ublock is back to winning, and I only occasionally have to refresh my cache

        • Zekas@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yup, for me it was enhancer for Youtube's ad blocker that was interfering. Didn't see the popup since turning it off.

        • Vree@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          I freshly installed win10 Firefox+uBlock and got this message after a while (was around 2weeks ago) first I could x the message, then the message had a timer, then 1-3 vids until block and then blocked.

          That was at my parents house, now I’m back in my home with different pc win11 (same fresh FireFox+uBlock) and now I don’t get these messages anymore.

          • Azzu@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            That probably was the "not up-to-date filter lists" problem, or the rare "filter lists themselves not updated yet", but they are within a few hours usually.

        • SailorMoss@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m not on YouTube’s side. But, ultimately Youtube has the advantage here. You guys are talking about technical solutions to get YouTube to continue sending you videos. But, YouTube has the nuclear option in their back pocket. Enshitification, YouTube is one of the only platforms that still works well on the internet without an app or logging in. If they want to badly enough they’ll stop allowing people to use YouTube signed out and ban accounts that watch with Adblock enabled.

          We need to work on building platforms that work outside of Google. I think the hardest question is how would that work with monetization for new/smaller creators.

        • tchotchony@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Only had ublock active, still happens. For now it still goes away on refresh or if I switch adblockers (so I'm assuming cleaning out the cache daily will work too).

      • Waker@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I use Firefox and also got that pop-up. Eventually I just grew tired of clicking the “X” button so I went on uBlock origin and added that stupid banner and the banner background to the blacklist.

        It’s like nothing ever happened. And if shit continues to get worse, either someone comes up with a fix somehow, or I’ll just find a way to run ReVanced YouTube apk on my pc or something. I don’t care if I have to emulate it somehow.

        Also, on mobile GrayJay is a good alternative to ReVanced. Made by LouisRossmann’s team apparently.

        • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          I haven't seen it yet either, not on firefox nor on chrome. From what I hear it's being rolled out gradually, so if you didn't get a notice yet, it doesn't mean that you won't get one in the future.

        • ahto@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Youtube have been increasing their anti-adblock efforts dramatically in the last few weeks, changing the scripts multiple times a day. The ublock origin team is very quick in updating the filters though. They have a post on their subreddit with some details.

    • soggy_kitty@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You have no idea? You know exactly why people download/buy the most popular thing at any time and you also know most people don't change anything unless it's broken.

      "Broken" is a variable scale which heavily depends on the users in this instance

      • silicon_reverie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I swear half the users here are running NixOS these days (with the other half on Arch). Redditors like Linux, but Lemmings take it to an whole new level.

    • Cassus@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Even that might be going a bit short. In the long run it’s probably better to switch to piped, freetuhe, invidous, etc.

    • dzervas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve never (almost?) used chrome as main for the past 15+ years

      but he’ll, the last years updates are more and more unstable. Tab and browser crashes are to be expected multiple times per week (ok browser crash maybe once per week)

      Also I actually miss WebUSB, WebBluetooth (I work with embedded as a hobby and it’s very convenient) and background blur (nobody wants to allow camera blur in ff, especially linux)

      • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        For me Firefox haven't crashed once in a year or more, even though I'm a heavy user: using it every day for multiple hours as a "tab hoarder", with quite a few addons.

        I also rarely restart it, as I don't turn off my computer completely, so the Firefox process is usually as old as the time of last system reboot.

        I think you may have ran into a rare bug, that has got persisted in your browser profile.
        You may create a new browser profile (e.g. on the about:profiles page) and set your things up there, and most likely it'll be stable.
        I think there's also a "refresh Firefox" button somewhere where average people would look for it, but I don't know where it is. But be aware that this will delete everything in Firefox, where's if you create a new profile, the new profile will start with a clean slate and you can switch back and forth between the old one if you find out you need something from there (e.g. old passwords that you haven't transferred, a specific about:config setting if you use those, addon settings, …), or even have them open at the same time.

        • dzervas@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          there’s a very high chance that something’s off with my profile but deleting my profile is not worth it (yet?)

          Losing my history isn’t something I take lightly - at all

          Tell you the truth I’m just “harvesting” anger to fix the fucking bug and fix it “properly”. I hope

      • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        About the other points.

        I see your point, personally I prefer WebUsb, WebBluetooth and such to be completely missing, so it's much less likely that a bug allows access to these to a site.

        Bluring camera background seems to me very specific to webcams, and even if chromium based browsers will do it for you, I think you are better off with running OBS and it's virtual webcam functionality, as it has been made for that purpose (video processing), and it can do much more if you want (including cropping, ways to improve video quality, or even do greenboxing). Introducing background bluring to the browser would mean more requests to add this or that effect (even if it should actually be the task of the web app), and I think it's hard to maintain even a single such effect (that does not blur everything, but only certain parts of the image) if your devs don't have extensive experience in video processing. This would be a feature that if introduced, either would break once and stay that way for quite some time, or would take significant development resources to find the problem and keep it working.

        • dzervas@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I knooooooow, my feeling for WebUSB/whatever are completely love/hate. I come from a security background (and hobby) but the alternative to WebUSB is horrible and implementation specific - you need to download the binary, install the correct version of the X programmer and make it kiss your debugger. It’s bad.

          Also I just don’t wanna open chrom* - I do but I’d like to tell a huge fuck off

          About camera blur: What I wanted to point out is the lack of some “exotic” features that firefox lacks. the blur implementation is not in chrome but in each web app - means there’s the required api to do that

          But it’s niche, I don’t care that much. there’s also a py project on gh that does exactly that: blur your background and expose a fake cam. It’s not “production ready” but it’s ok

  • MrWafflesNBacon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    107
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I'm still waiting for my "AdBlOcKeR bAd 😭" popup, at this point I'm actually disappointed it hasn't shown up yet.

    • aeternum@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      hasn't shown up for me either. I mostly use invidious, but i just tried directly on youtube, and it works with an adblocker too.

    • theneverfox@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve been binging YouTube, preparing to disengage forever…

      It’s been weeks now. The popup still hasn’t come up

    • XpeeN@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I wanted to say the same but then remembered I'm using piped for a while now lol

    • Kuma@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I only got it on my desktop which has other addons too (blocked the popup with ublocker so i even forgot about it). Phone and tablet is still safe.

  • Stoneykins [any]@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    People keep saying this but I guess I'm on the lucky slow end of the rollout because I haven't had my adblock stop working yet.

    But they've done this before, it's just a cycle. If I have to, I'll start using a new adblocker, or entirely diffent way to access the videos, once an option becomes available shortly, inevitably. No reason to worry about this long term IMO.

      • JGrffn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        When? I’m one video away from being blocked and I manually updated my ublock stuff like a week ago.

        • MorningstarCorndog@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I had to re-update last night. I’ve heard it’s a bit of an arms race currently, so you might need to regularly update.

          Personally I’m getting libredirect up and considering full abandonment of all the major platforms. I’m already on lemmy, I might as well move away from everything else that is that is going through enshittification.

    • mcqtom@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Man, I’m still waiting on Netflix to tell me my parents and I can’t use the same account. They asked for an email verification code one time and that’s been it.

      Honestly I’m just kind of blue balled at this point. Just make me cancel already!

      • Camelbeard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Same here, but Netflix is going to increase prices again, so that might be the final straw to ditch them for me

      • FiveMacs@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Spotify has been harassing me to get whatever the heck the duo crap is…literally only me uses it but I’m on the verge of cancelling from their full screen garbage

        • mcqtom@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s too bad. Just in these last few days I’ve been messing around with free Spotify and I was wondering if it might be worth trying out paying for it.

          What exactly is the full screen garbage you’re talking about?

          • FiveMacs@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Telling me to upgrade to duo so I can share my login for whatever reason. It’s just annoying more then anything.

    • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      This has pissed off a lot of people, including tech youtubers that have had to turn to alternative income sources like sponsors and patreon that are working on or promoting as blockers.

  • synestia@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    1 year ago

    After updating my uBlock lists to the latest version the popup no longer appears. Something to try out.

  • thantik@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Copy the URL, open it in a private window with ublock origin set to allowed in private windows. Can still view the video, and now they also can't attribute it to your user account.

    So they lose again.

    • SuperIce@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      1 year ago

      They can definitely still associate it to your household by IP though. Me and my roommates get video suggestions for things the others are interested in because of the IP tracking.

    • IHeartBadCode@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Or just don’t ever sign in to YouTube and always clear cookies when you close the browser. And out of curiosity, why do people actually sign into YouTube? For “favorites” I just use my browsers bookmarks and it’s not like “hitting that bell” actually helps me because usually I won’t watch a just published video until I’m ready to actually watch something. So struggling to think of a reason to sign in except for the one time I need to increase the subscriber count for them. And even then, I promptly log out.

      • nottheengineer@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because their algorithm is pretty damn good at recommending relevant stuff. For example, titanfall 2 got revived and I found a lot of small youtubers (<20k subs) making some incredibly good content through it. The secret is to click "not interested" on all the clickbait crap often enough and at some point it'll learn.

        Though I do use SmartTube on an android TV and block out crap like shorts altogether because google's youtube app is unusable.

      • shootwhatsmyname@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Only thing I can think of is getting notified for new videos from youtubers you’re subscribed to and the convenience of saving the play position when you don’t finish a video

      • CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        For “favorites” I just use my browsers bookmarks

        They don't work over multiple devices though, unless you have an account for your browser I guess.

        • IHeartBadCode@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Firefox syncs all my bookmarks for me across all devices. So that might be the account thing you’re talking about.

      • thantik@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Like most things, it's their recommendation engine that is actually pretty good. For as much as people complain about "the algorithm", it's useful enough that it surfaces unknown people constantly for me, and suggests things that I am interested in watching (metalworking videos, welding, machining, 3d printing, godot programming, etc.) Without an account you just get… normie bullshit clickbait.

  • Zerush@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Maybe I’ve found a definitive solution, because adblocking only works for a few days, until Google noticed it and put contrameasures. In Firefox install Tampermonkey and in it this script

    https://greasyfork.org/en/scripts/477725-youtube-iframe-adblocker

    In Vivaldi no need of Tampermonkey, download the link to an folder and don’t delete it. Open the Extension page in developer mode and drag the script in it. Done

    It is an ingenious userscript that helps persistent YouTube viewers bypass the frustrating “Ad blockers are not allowed on YouTube” message. It employs a clever technique of dynamically inserting an iframe player to replace the standard YouTube player. This method effectively circumvents YouTube’s ad-blocker detection, allowing for an uninterrupted, ad-free viewing experience even after YouTube’s standard measures have been triggered. So you can still use your adblocker without problems.

    • Sparking@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      I would just caution anyone that blocking ads while logged into your Google account is probably a bad idea if you care about still watching videos there. Google will grow more desperate to show tracked ads to users.

      The only ling term solution is to seek to watch YouTube e videos in a private way. Freestone is a good start. New piped and individuals look promising as well. I’m still researching a good long term solution.

      • Zerush@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Front-ends and streaming platforms are several outsite, but Google also is blocking those, its not a solution for a long term. I was recently using FreeTube as a desktop client, but it has become unusable. I recently replaced VLC with SMPlayer, MMplayer like VLC but way better, also FOSS, this allows me to watch, among others, streaming videos from different sites, among others also from YT so far without problems. I also use an extension (FOSS) that allows me to record the audio of the active tab and save it as mp3, that is, with this it does not matter whether it is a music video from YT or from other sources and with this outside of Google’s control.

        A good option is also IMDB, or better its online service, Odysee, which allows you to import subscriptions and playlists from YT, it is somewhat complicated to do, but it is guided. Odysee is not related to Google, it has a UI similar to YT and a good number of videos of all kinds, many have already moved to this platform. In my opinion it is the best direct alternative to YT.

        In any case, at least so far, this userscript works wonderfully and I think it will continue to work, since it prevents YT from discovering that you use an adblocker, not like other anti adblock killers whose script I also have in the Vivaldi blocker list, since these do block the YT detector, which naturally has already been discovered, however this script does not block the YT detector, but surrounds it by putting a “mask” over the video, with which the detector passes underneath without discovering anything.

        The risk that YT discovers it and blocks me? Yes it does anyway if I continue using an adblocker and I prefer to suck my elbow before deactivating the ad- and all the other blockers on YT and swallowing all the garbage of ads, clickbaits and the other shit that YT is full of (a single music video, blocked 12 ads and more than 20 trackers and without the Clickbait Remover, YT completely changes the thumbnails it shows, which mostly have nothing to do with the content). No, thanks

        • Sparking@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah, I definitely agree, and haven’t looked into all the options yet. It is pretty logical that they would catch on to stuff like free-tube very quickly. But I still think the only reasonable posture is to view video content anonymously, until google goes the twitter route and demands that you identify yourself to watch a video. They kind of already do that for mature content.

          • Zerush@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I know, there still videos blocked for NSFW content, where you need to identify you, eg the music video from Harakiri for the Sky - Funeral Dream is flagged as such, but you can still warch it from an other upload, Also not a problem to watch it in Andisearch or SMPlayer. But this filter has nothing to do with the current adblocker problem, age restricted vids in YT are exist since several years.

      • gila@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Google’s desperation to show tracked ads is but one vector in the equation which determines longterm viability for watching Youtube ad-free for free. There are also other vectors to consider like the level of obtrusion required to actually effectively adblock-block, and its related effect on the userbase. And also just the level of inconvenience presented by ads, determined by their length, skippability etc.

        The proportion of the userbase blocking ads is still relatively negligible, and this is an outcome manufactured by Google toeing the line between too obtrusive and too ineffective. Any measure I can imagine which would actually capture a significant portion of users blocking ads would also significantly skew the balance in favour of obtrusivity, which they would pay for in lost users.

        As long as many users are happy to continue being vigilant in blocking ads, IMO this balance will ensure blocking ads will remain feasible.

        • Sparking@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Long term, google will demand our identity to serve video data to us, even if only out of principle. I just think that service will degrade in the pursuit of more price extraction.

          I have a longer term project to decouple my identity and property from online services. Part of the reaso thnat I am also on lemmy in the first place. With google products, it is becoming clear that anonymous use is really the only answer.

          • gila@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            In general I would agree, but as it pertains to Youtube adblock blocking - there is no gradual slide into degradation (apart from perhaps to do with the implementation of ads itself, though I’d argue they’re less obtrusive now than in their original implementation many years ago).

            There is fundamentally no way to adblock-block today which does not involve collecting info in a way that causes obvious privacy concerns. It’s not somewhere Google can get to by taking little steps. The adblock-blocking that’s been happening to date is easily circumvented. Logically an arms race between adblockers and adblock-blockers will ensue, except in practice it’d be like raising the stakes from a civil war re-enactment to actual nuclear war

            • Sparking@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Right. That is why I am saying: beocme anonymous now before google demands your identity to watch videos. That is where I believe this is headed.

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    1 year ago

    If I had any programming ability above the level of a sloth I’d make a blocker called “Muffler” that basically separated out all the adstreams and made them think they were viewed and played in real time, but invisible to the user.

    Shouting into the void, and nothing to be done about it as they’d look like they were being played.

    • Voyajer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      Sounds like what adnauseam is doing. It loads ads hidden and clicks on some of them but I am not sure if it does that with YouTube ads or just blocks them.

      • LinkOpensChest.wav@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        So does this cause advertisers to lose money since their ads are being clicked but never viewed by human eyes? Because if so, I’ll install ad nauseum asap

        • Uncle_Bagel@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          I thinkk the main idea behind ad naseum is to drown out any information you leave behind. Basically it hiides your data in a pile of useless and fake data that becomes useless.

        • BaumGeist@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not for AdSense ads, like what YouTube uses. Click-Through Rate (CTR) is only used to determine how much of a cut Google gives to the ad hosts, the advertisers just bid for the spots. The advertisers can see the CTR metrics, and so they might be willing to bid more, but that’s not guaranteed.

          So google makes money either way, and the advertisers spend money either way. The only difference is that your favorite websites and youtubers get paid too.

          • LinkOpensChest.wav@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Hmmm well for some reason I was under the impression that ad nauseum can be used alongside uBO, but I see now that it can’t so I guess I’ll keep uBO since I’ve got a ton of custom filters, but this was insightful so thanks.

    • ZMonster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      In a vice versa way, that's pi hole. The website makes ad requests to the DNS and pi hole says:

      Naw dawg

      • araozu@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Like, downloading the video files with yt-dlp and then uploading them? Or streaming, like what Piped/LibreTube do?

        I personally have my own piped server, and don't enter to youtube for anything. The only 2 things it can't do are post comments and see live streams comments. No ads, no tracking, i can do whatever i want without google's permission

    • nicoweio@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not a bad idea, but if possible, you want to skip loading the ad altogether, which is – to my understanding – what currently happens.

      • evranch@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is so inherently detectable, though, I'm amazed it worked for so long and that it's still working now. Likely a consequence of offloading as much of YT onto the client side as possible, because if you're doing anything server side how hard is it to require that the ad has at least downloaded before streaming the video?

        The Spotify ripper "zotify" has an undetectable "realtime" mode that does basically what OP suggested. Instead of downloading every track as fast as possible, it pretends that it's actually streaming and listening to them. Obviously it takes a lot longer to rip a whole album, but it's a good idea.

        I think Spotify ripping isn't big enough that it's actually needed at this point, but it's good that they considered the potential for it.

        • Lt_Cdr_Data@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          I always thought the reason they don't take any action, is exactly because adblockers would then work as the guy above described.

          Companies posting ads would eventually become aware, that a not insignificant portion of viewers don't even see the ads they are paying for. I don't see how this won't cause a backlash… i guess youtube calculated that in and thinks it'll be worth it any way.

          • evranch@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Good point, if you're counting ad impressions and billing accordingly then it's better to simply lose the impression than bill the customer for displaying a "ghost ad".

            However this is exactly what's happening to sponsors with SponsorBlock, their section gets skipped and nobody knows (well, the channel owner knows from the watch stats, but does the sponsor demand those stats, do they only pay for clickthroughs on the referral link, I have no idea how the YT sponsor ecosystem works)

            • Nahdahar@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              They don’t need any other information than referral link clicks/signups and video views, one of which they have metrics on, the other is public information. A SponsorSkip user is equal in their eyes to a person who isn’t interested in the product.

        • The Overlord@tsck.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m personally not a big fan of spotify ripping, the audio quality isn’t great and more annoying. If I were you I’d check out Soulseek or the alternative ui Nicotine+

  • HeChomk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    1 year ago

    No love for freetube? Started using it a few days ago and it’s actually brilliant. Rather than contunue with the constant battle back and forth with ublock and YouTube, I’ve just taken the nuclear option and blown away the front end. It’s amazing. Loads faster than the Web version of YouTube too.

    • Amends1782@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also invidious and also Piped, tons of options. Or say fuck you to google all together and go for odyssee or something

      • axb@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Which Invidio.us instance would you recommend? I’m looking for one that’s the most stable and relatively fast compared to other instances. Also, I believe it’s also geography dependent because instances don’t have CDNs?

      • pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        PeerTube has some pretty good lofi streams. I use it for that and not YouTube anymore.

        Nebula.tv is a good paid streaming service if you like science goodness.

        What others are there? 🤔

    • Sparking@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, I thinknthebmost important aspect of these things is that we have to start consuming video without letting Google track our activity. Whether it is Freestone or another client, this means tacking our own video preferences and searching for likewise content manually.

      I am a bit worried that long term, Google will simply withold video content. Without the ability to track users, and be the definitive authority on what a view means, Google really has no reason to stream video to people for free. Eventually, Google, in their desperation will resort to more and more forceful measures to track people who watch your videos - invalidating your Google account and cutting off your access to drive, maps, and search is a possibility.

      It is prudent to get off of their client and go private now. But we also have to think about replacing the backend, similar to how lemmy is replacing the reddit backend. Peertube exists, but it is a much heavier lift for self hosting. I would also want to see a client that is committed to mixing youtube videos with peertube bidoes, or other backends before it is too late.

    • yukichigai@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      If you're not afraid of Docker you can even spin up your own instance of Invidious. You won't get much in the way of recommendations, but you won't have to worry about the site going down.

      Be the frontend you want to see in the world.

        • dx1@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          That's a way taller order than you might think. Docker has loads of kernel level integration that FreeBSD isn't interested in supporting, also there are separate techs for similar purposes, like jails.

          • ryannathans@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah, so if projects don't support freebsd I'm out. Tired of everyone's fetish for docker, even Canonical have added freebsd style jails to ubuntu now

            • Justin@lemmy.jlh.name
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              cgroups are very different and much more powerful than freebsd jails. The server world is leaving freebsd for Linux.

                • Justin@lemmy.jlh.name
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  The problem with podman is that we use stuff like Docker-compose and tilt at work, that require the docker daemon socket. I do try to use podman when possible, though. But yeah, I avoid Red Hat these days, that company is doomed.

                  I use kubernetes+containerd for my servers, which is neither Docker nor Podman.

        • DacoTaco@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Podman to the rescue! Screw docker, podman is so much better and a quick google tells me there is a freebsd package of podman soooo

  • Gilberto@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    1 year ago

    Make sure you're using the latest version of uBlockOrigin, then update all your filters. Should work just fine.

    • Dioz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not OP, but I tried that a couple of times and it always works for like 2 hours and then the popup reappears. I don't have any other extensions activated which might mess with uBlocks config, any ideas what I'm doing wrong?

      • Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You are being unlucky is what you are doing wrong. The changes on YT are not being rolled out to all users at the same time. You could just be in a location or in a part of the network where changes are applied first. Nothing you can do to change that, just wait for the filter lists to catch up. Or migrate to piped or Invidious.

        This whole "Firefox, Firefox, Firefox" chanting as if it prevents the ad block detection is ridiculous. The reason why FF users got spared for longer is because the marketshare of FF is so low, that it took longer until most of them were affected purely based on random chance.

        I use Chrome on my work laptop and FF on my PC and I either get the detection message on both or I don't get it on either device.

  • Shurimal@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 year ago

    Vivaldi with uBlock Origin here. A simple refresh of the page makes the popup go away, often for the rest of the session. For me, it's YT without ads as usual. I might need to clear uBlock cache and refresh filter lists to make it work even better. There's also a Tampermonkey script for blocking the popup, but I haven't tried it yet.

    As a side note, I've seen a lot of talk about boycotting Youtube. There are 3 things to consider with this:

    1. Boycotting YT will give Google exactly what they want, getting rid of the "freeloaders" who don't pay for Premium and block ads.
    2. Boycotting YT will hurt small creators who don't see much ad revenue (if any) anyway. Views and likes are what make small creators visible to the algorithm, if these drop off, their reach will diminish.
    3. Boycotting YT won't affect big creators with sponsorships, healthy Patreon community, millions of subscribers and views.
      Best way of defiance here is not stopping to use YT, but on the contrary, generating as much traffick to YT as possible while blocking the ads.
    • RVMWSN@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I don't agree, the best way would be to start using alternatives like lbry and/or peertube. These platforms are in a catch 22, creators won't upload because there are no viewers, viewers won't watch because there is little content. Every new viewer and/or creator on a YT-competitor has quite a big impact in the long run. This is a perfect moment in time to motivate people to boycot YT.

      • Shurimal@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        start using alternatives like lbry and/or peertube

        Sure. But actively using YT without paying for Premium and blocking all the ads will affect them more, and if enough people do it, might actually catalyze it to go Twixxer levels of enshittification, which would be just as beneficial for growing the userbase of those alternatives with the side benefit of getting rid of one of the gatekeepers. Fediverse saw a huge growth in popularity following the recent enshittification of Reddit, after all. "Build it and they will come" has a corollary that goes "Destroy it and they'll go elsewhere" :)

      • Azzu@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It's not that creators won't upload because there are no viewers. It's because on other platforms there is no way to earn money. "Because there are no viewers" doesn't make sense, because it costs a creator literally nothing to upload a video multiple times, to more platforms, instead of only once, which would theoretically only increase their reach in total. However, creators want their viewers to watch on YouTube because that's where the money is earned.

    • Shea@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Dude just watch the ads so people get paid… It's like a simple 30 seconds out of your day each time (AT THE WORST… Most ads are not that long and can be skipped). You're not automatically entitled to free content, the content is generally provided to you under the assumption that you will do your absolutely minimal part by watching an ad. This is such a disgusting attitude.

      • Shurimal@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Dude just watch the ads so people get paid…

        I don't care. Hypothetical incomes of other people are not my problem or obligation. Next you'll be saying I must eat at restaurants at least three days a week and attend all concerts and drama plays in my town because otherwise people don't get paid.

        You’re not automatically entitled to free content

        Correct. First I need to manually set up my tools, and then these tools get me free content automatically. But I don't care about entitlement; it's a spook. It's all down to risk-benefit. The risk of blocking youtube ads is basically nil, but I benefit by wasting less time and not having loud, imbecile and completely irrelevant audio-visual crap annoying me. I also pirate all my music, movies and shows. Because I don't care. I like free stuff. Copyright is a spook, anyway.