(shrug) don't care if it affects views, never should have had them in videos regardless.
Technology
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
The only real alternatives to ads are either paying for the content, or having someone else pay for you. The latter is the case with something like PeerTube - someone else is covering the cost of the server and bandwidth without asking you for payment, and the creator doesn't get money from you just watching the video.
i really don’t care
rather do without than with ads
Paying to access content makes a lot more sense that hoping someone willingly watches an advert on their own hardware.
An indirect, alternate could be universal basic income - which makes it easier for people to choose less profitable options.
A lot of people either don't want to pay, or can't pay (eg people in developing nations with very low income). I agree that UBI would help, but we're a long way off from that being a standard thing in one country, let alone worldwide.
Creators are paid based on those views, so that would matter.
@kokesh@lemmy.world @Zen_Shinobi@lemmy.world
Creators are paid based on those views if they're willing to be dependent on them.
There are many, many ways for a content creator to be supported (and a viewer/follower to support them) without relying on Google: Kofi, OpenCollective, even Patreon, to name a few. And there are platforms specifically paid by the viewer, such as Nebula.
It's worth mentioning: donation is a thing and many do donation-based projects. It can be even a direct bank transfer from a viewer to the bank account of the content creator. I say this as someone who did support content creators and donated to them. In the past, I used to pay for membership for two specific Youtube channels, back when I still used to use Youtube. When I stopped using Youtube, I went from YT membership to direct, bank transfer to both creators behind these channels. I wished they would choose to use some private PeerTube instance/channel (it's a thing) or even Nebula, but they stubbornly chose to stick to Google's walled garden, unfortunately leaving me with no choice but to stop watching them both.
YouTube is completely broken on my Apple TV — the last platform I have which actually does display ads. When the app loads, I get a black screen. When I tap on a video (click on it? on the remote?) it goes black, stutters through an ad, stutters through the next one, then stutters through the video for a couple seconds. Sometimes I have to start the video over. If I were running an ad blocker, I would expect static like this... but I'm not. I don't have a PiHole. The Apple TV has direct, unfiltered access to my WiFi. The ads are showing, but the app is just... broken. On my computers (Macs) I get a perfect experience, because I use Firefox with uBlock Origin like a sane person who knows what they're doing.
The black screen on the TV could be related to your TV’s HDR settings. Only recent TVs have started to decrease that temporary stutter between SDR/HDR.
It was annoying as hell in ad rolls before I started to pay for YT lite so my kid wouldn’t be advertised to.
No longer paying since they shuttered the YT Kids app on TvOS.
I assume the recent forced JS which recently broke downloaders and alt front-ends is connected to this somehow.
For reference, here are the exceptions I've been using to try to make sure my viewership counts. Not sure if they're all needed and they're probably overkill, but:
@@||youtube.com/api$domain=youtube.com|google.com
@@||youtube.com/youtubei$domain=youtube.com|google.com
@@||youtube.com/ptracking$domain=youtube.com|google.com
@@||play.google.com/log$domain=youtube.com|google.com
! these are meant for checking for active internet connection (https://www.techtapto.com/what-is-gstatic-why-you-see-it-often/#Is_Gstatic_com_generate_204_a_virus)
@@||youtube.com/generate_204$domain=youtube.com|google.com
@@||google.com/generate_204$domain=youtube.com|google.com
@@||youtube.com/gen_204$domain=youtube.com|google.com
@@||google.com/gen_204$domain=youtube.com|google.com
*Goolag shooting itself on foot be like.
The dev community is just adapting to shit thrown.
Something that I've been confused about ever since people have been talking about this, is that there didn't seem to be a change of views from mobile devices. Like, I know that adblockers are less common on mobile devices because most people either don't know they are available or aren't using browsers that have/support (good) adblockers. But, was there really no noticeable change at all?
There was. Some channels even saw most of their decline from mobile/TV viewers.
That doesn't necessarily mean that wasn't also related to the adblocker issue, though. How the algorithm reacted to the dramatic change in views could have made waves that saw channels de-recommended or caused it to ignore sections of a viewer's watch history and thus the recommendations shown to them as well.
With the algorithm everything gets tied together so much that any disruption can have unpredictable effects.