this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2023
110 points (97.4% liked)

Hacker News

202 readers
3 users here now

This community serves to share top posts on Hacker News with the wider fediverse.

Rules0. Keep it legal

  1. Keep it civil and SFW
  2. Keep it safe for members of marginalised groups

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

There is a discussion on Hacker News, but feel free to comment here as well.

top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] bangupjobasusual 54 points 1 year ago (4 children)

This is an arms race YouTube cannot win

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

They can win by making videos only accessible via account and aggressively banning adblock users. It will hurt it at first but people would rather accept it instead of finding a replacement. I expect this to happen in a few years.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Nothing can beat a VCR with an ad skipper.

And I am not afraid to use it.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They can just embed the ads in the actual video, server side.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Sponsorblock would still work, wouldn't?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Yeah. Which is pretty much undefeatable unless they get rid of the ability to skip sections of a video entirely and I don't think there'll be wanting to do that. Sponsor block doesn't exactly block things, it just skips sections of a video that the community has submitted it's not quite the same thing.

Those sections might be intro animations, that bit where they go "hey guys my name is XYZ YouTuber smash that like button and don't forget to subscribe comment and ring that bell!" etc

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ads can be randomly placed so there is no specific timestamp to skip.

This would obviously be very costly for Google, which is likely why they haven’t done it yet, but ultimately an ad blocker wouldn’t be able to block those.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Don't give them any ideas, a'right? But yeah. That's true. We could skip those identifying per frame/time, but adblocking would need more resources.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Well, if googles web integrity api becomes reality, every site that makes money from ads will refuse to serve any modified client.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I thought they backed out of that a couple weeks ago already

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It doesn't really matter they can't implement it if the other browsers aren't on board.

So they haven't so much backed out as much as they've been forced to give up with the idea because no one else wants to do it. Because why would you, it only benefits YouTube?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You are underestimating companies. Twitch won this race. YouTube can win too.

[–] bangupjobasusual 4 points 1 year ago

Twitch has the unique use case of live streaming, which makes the content’s timeliness a factor in the users experience.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

How did twitch win? Would you not say that YouTube has a larger user base, and therefore a larger target of this sort of cracking?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Surely if they can block adblockers they can block this as well?

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago

i'm nit seeing any ads using ublock origin, i doubt thst they are blocking anythibg except from worse adblocks

[–] otp 2 points 1 year ago

This has been my secret weapon for a long time.