YouTube is currently experimenting with server-side ad injection. This means that the ad is being added directly into the video stream.

This breaks sponsorblock since now all timestamps are offset by the ad times.

For now, I set up the server to detect when someone is submitting from a browser with this happening and rejecting the submission to prevent the database from getting filled with incorrect submissions.

  • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I miss the times when ads were just annoying gifs on the left or right side of a web page. Then they evolved, abusing javascript, to become pop ups that hid the URL bar and opened 3 dozen different pop ups while you didn’t close the mother popup. Then they started clickjacking: that close ad button? Just opens another ad. Ad infinitum.

    Now, effectively editing the video to add an ad somewhere instead of serving it as a side file. The advertising industry as a whole feels like the absolute worst villains at a personal level, because they want to target you individually.

    • ssj2marx@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Google ads were originally a panacea for really bad popups of the early 2000s. Google had a strict list of dos and don’ts, and ad revenues were high enough that most websites only ran one or two.

  • ssm@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Switch to 3rd party clients like pipe-viewer (doesn’t need api key), it’s less likely (though I suppose not impossible) google would roll this out against 3rd party clients as they can’t track you for targeted ads.

    To people thinking of joining Nebula because their marketing team/shills are currently spamming this thread, see peertube (federated like lemmy, open source)

    • Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      If they are injecting ads into the actual video stream; it won’t matter what client you use. You request the next video chunk for playback and get served a chunk filled with advertising video instead. The clients won’t be able to tell the difference unless they start analyzing the actual video frames. That’s an entirely server-side decision that clients can’t bypass.

    • refalo@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      While I think federated services are a good idea in theory, the unfortunate reality is that they’re also privacy and GDPR minefields that nobody has figured out how to make legal yet.

    • Bongles@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      To people thinking of joining Nebula because their marketing team/shills are currently spamming this thread, see peertube (federated like lemmy, open source)

      Peertube is fine, but like lemmy (but worse), there’s barely anything there. Nebula at least got creators from YouTube to make ad-free versions for Nebula. If the channels that a person are subscribed to don’t exist in Peertube, that’s not an appealing alternative for them.

    • ssj2marx@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      People will say, “but then how could a website like YouTube exit at all?”

      To which I say that we should retvrn to sharing funny videos via long email chains.

      • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        See Flash websites ripping each other off for five years on either side of Youtube’s introduction.

        See Bittorrent moving more video than Netflix until like 2012.

        See twenty years of web-based P2P experiments. Weirdos with fat hard drives (hi) will always be happy to seed.

        Or - crazy thought - services could cost money. It would not take much. Youtube’s not getting ten bucks each time you watch a video. Bandwidth and storage keep getting cheaper. Nor are they paying for content, unlike Netflix and so on, and those fuckers are also considering ads.

        • ssj2marx@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          I’ve got no problem paying money for a service that’s worth it. I still buy games on Steam even though I know how to pirate them because Valve’s service is so goddamn convenient it beats piracy in many ways.

          Netflix used to be that good, and when YouTube Red rolled out I bought a year of it. But things have deteriorated significantly since then and the price has only gone up.

  • jesterkun@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Genuinely I’d be fine if someone made a thing that when an ad started a black overlay would go up and the spund would be muted.

  • Björn Tantau@swg-empire.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I wonder how that will interoperate with timestamps provided by users in comments or by the video creator themselves. Maybe those can be used to detect inserted ads.

    • Baggins [he/him]@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      The server must have to send some metadata to the client telling when it’s running an ad because there are other things that need to happen client side during that like adjusting of the time or making the ad clickable

    • ayaya@lemdro.id
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I have actually been seeing some timestamps that are completely wrong lately, maybe this is why.

  • Mikina@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Looks like I’ll finally get a reason to cut off another website I hate using, but never found the willpower to get rid off.

    Good

    • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I’ll buy premium when they finally manage to either prevent adblocking entirely or make it sufficiently inconvenient. Stopping using YouTube is not an option for me and neither is watching ads. YouTube (along with porn) is the internet for me. If I’m not viewing either content, I’m probably not on my computer.

      Hell, I don’t even blame them. I can’t morally justify blocking ads and viewing their content for free. I do it because it’s easy and I get away with it. I don’t believe in ads-based business model and that basically leaves subscribtion as the only viable alternative. Not paying and still using the service isn’t exactly practicing what I preach.

      • Onihikage@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        I’d get premium if they weren’t so insistent on bundling in bullshit I don’t want or care about to justify the high price. I put up with enough of that from cable TV. I’ll pay when there’s an ad-free tier that doesn’t do anything else and is a reasonable price for “the service that’s free with ads, but without ads”. If there was a per-device premium tier that I could throw on my Roku, and all my family members could have premium when they stream from there, I’d pay for that. I’d pay for family tier if it didn’t have the dumb single-household rule which screws over truckers and those who travel for a living.

        Google has options they could take to convince consumers to pay to not see ads, but there’s no creativity left there, no effort to court the market or adapt the service and prices to what potential customers need and are willing to pay. And it’s because they believe they are the market, and want to keep it that way.

      • stardust@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I’m pretty lucky not liking most YouTube style content these days, so don’t consume too much of it like I used to. Lot of the creators feel like AI with the same phrase of if you are new to the channel like and subscribe and ring the notification bell…blah blah blah. And then drag out info that can be said in a minute into a 10 minute long ramble for the algorithm.

        YouTube these days is more for music or checking out a part of a game I’m stuck on these days from a creator with like 1 sub putting up a 10 second long clip that gets straight to the point. Those guys are the heroes over the 5+ minute long uploads of the same content in comparison that has you have to dig into the comments to find where to skip to.

        • auzas_1337@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Tbh, I don’t think there is a definite “youtube style” that describes all content on youtube. There are some similarities and within categories of videos you can find styles that are more popular within that category, but site wide I would say it provides quite a bit of variety.

          What could be called youtube style is that it’s not TV. In that sense YT style and TV style maybe make some sense.

          • stardust@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            I see YouTube style as the ones that are formulic with the plea to like and subscribe segue to sponsor and the obviously algorithm driven increased lengthen followed by the same tired robotic plea for interaction which is pretty much every big YouTube channel or wannabe big channel.

            Doesn’t help that search pushes up those type of channels and shoves smaller channels just uploading content just to share something.

      • ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        I can’t morally justify blocking ads and viewing their content for free.

        I can’t morally justify anything they are doing, and have been doing for many many years already. Yet I use their public services because they are unavailable. But I would never give money to such a company.

        • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          The fact that you use their services despite claiming to oppose them probably tells more about how you really feel than your words do. You’re benefiting from their abusive business model the same whey they themselves are. Justifying the continued use of their services by not paying is just a cope to deal with the cognitive dissonance.

  • Gacrux@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    does this mean stuff like yt-dlp will download videos with ads in thrm as well?

    • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Almost certainly not, although fair disclaimer, I don’t actually know. Ads need to be tailored to the user when delivered, so it’s likely the YouTube frontend requesting the next chunk of video to be an ad instead of the next chunk of video from blob storage. yt-dlp likely just requests successive chunks straight from blob storage, passing this.

      If YouTube served ads by saying “point to an ad chunk next” in their blob storage, 1. Everyone would see the same ad and 2. Premium users would still see ads.

      To patch this, YouTube really needs to stop serving video chunks directly from storage, but I forget the reason they haven’t done that already.

      (Technical note; I’m assuming blob storage chunks contain 1-2 seconds of video and metadata pointing to the next one, like a linked list. I’m not sure if this is how YouTube works, but many video platforms do this)

      • ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Ads need to be tailored to the user when delivered

        1. It does not. If you install a new browser and open YouTube the first time, they’ll be able to show ads to you
        2. They could be tailored based on other factors too, like country, region, or even household by the IP

        I think the backend could just generate the ad ridden video feed for the specific user. Most probably it would be very resource intensive, but I can only hope so… but then I also don’t know much about HLS and other fragmented streams so it might not be a performance problem at all.

        like a linked list

        I think the full list of chunks is (currently) known beforehand. That’s how yt-dlp can download on multiple threads, but also how it can show the number of total fragments relatively quickly on the progress bar

      • Gacrux@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        yeah that makes sense. i was thinking maybe youtube had servers to decide what chunks clients would get, maybe by looking at whether or not they are premium users first. but anyway youtube still needs a way to differentiate between ad chunks and video chunks, otherwise we would just be able to skip 10 seconds through all the ads. surely that can be exploited somehow.

        • Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Ew. I’m not entering account credentials on anything I don’t own (ie, at work to see a tutorial on something I need to learn).

            • EveryMuffinIsNowEncrypted@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              Gross.

              Welp, I sure hope either we stay on the winning side of the cat-and-mouse game or a lot of creators jump ship to other emerging platforms (not that there are many), because it’d be a damn shame to have to stop watching some of the creators I enjoy watching. Many of them are damned talented folks IMHO.

              I’ve heard good things about Nebula, but sadly a lot of the channels I watch are not quite on there yet. Also, I’m broke, so there’s that. Lol.

  • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    It was inevitable (and is arguably the “logical” extension of sponsor segments).

    As for what it will do to timestamps: The same thing it does to timestamps in podcasts. Some podcast players have a special way to tag the timestamp to adjust with the inserted ads but NOBODY hosts with those. So they are rendered useless.

    On the youtube side? They could potentially be auto-adjusted because youtube will know how many ads were inserted . But considering the goal of this is to serve ads…

  • matto@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Also, if the ads where in different parts of the video every time, it would not be possible to use SponsorBlock for them :(

    • circasurvivor@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      How does a client know when to block the user from fast forwarding to prevent them from skipping over the ad? Could something like sponsorblock detect that to know where the ads are placed?

    • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Do you use Firefox?
      because Google intentionally nerfs loading performance on any non-Chrome browsers.

      I usually find if startup buffering takes more than 2-3 seconds on my home Internet, just refreshing the page magically makes it go away.

      • brb@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Yeah Firefox + Ublock Origin. It buffers for me indefinitely and the only way to fix it is to skip ahead 10 or so seconds. If I then go back 10 seconds it starts buffering again.

  • FreudianCafe@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    If they are part of the video you cant just skip them like any other part of the video, right?

    • aCosmicWave@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Different users would see unique ads. So your ad could be 12 seconds long while my ad is 30 seconds long. A timestamp based skip would no longer work universally.

    • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      That’s what SponsorBlock already does. It however doesn’t detect the sponsor but instead it jumps over a part of the video marked with timestamp but with different people seeing different lenght ads, these timestamps no-longer match.

  • LimeWire@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I’m kinda surprised they haven’t done this already. Twitch has been doing this for a while now, and the only reliable way around it is to use a proxy in a country that Twitch doesn’t run ads in.

    • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Video length is incredibly important to The Algorithm and a LOT of content creators time their videos to the second. Taking away control of that (even if the end result ins the exact same length) is going to ruffle a lot of feathers and lead to a lot of people who want to “be a champion for the viewers who should like, comment, and subscribe and use my referral code for war thunder” as a result.

    • gjghkk@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I think Twitch has gone to shit lately, because of their decisions, but I don’t know the numbers. Do you have any info about this?

      • LimeWire@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Oh, it’s been pretty crap for a while now. I constantly see viewers complain about AIDS ads and even content creators feel poorly about them.

        Looking at https://twitchtracker.com/statistics shows a relatively flat viewership base. Since January, they’ve seen a decrease of close to 15% viewers and concurrent channels. It appears that they had a large increase in viewers and channels in 2020, probably due to Covid, and since then they have been in decline.