• TargaryenTKE@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Not gonna lie, I bit the bullet and got YT Premium almost 5 years ago. Honestly, one of the best purchases I’ve ever made in my adult life, hands down

    • Xanis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’ve had it for AGES. I agree that ads have been a bit much and many websites almost unusable without Origin. YT Premium though has been fairly solid with a couple hiccups.

      Admittedly, I use YouTube as my primary source of entertainment. So the price is easily justified vs other services.

    • 9488fcea02a9@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I had Youtube premium when it included google play music. GPM was so good…

      I unsubscribed everything when they changed to youtube music. Terrible music platform

    • TheRealKuni@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Agreed. Plus I know my views pay slightly more to creators than ad-supported views (and far more than ad-block views) so I can feel superior to my fellow man.

      • can@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        You could use an ad blocker and give even more to the creators you like via Patreon (or ideally better means).

          • selokichtli@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Porque YouTube/Google gana mucho más que el dueño del canal por esa transacción, además de que lo hace explotando a cientos de miles o millones de personas en el mundo que quieren vivir de influencers.

      • glitches_brew@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I typically put children’s music on YouTube when driving with my kid. Not having to shuffle with the phone to skip ads while in the car is a life saver.

      • nexussapphire@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I think it’s worth it too. People are just weird about paying for a product that supports individuals creative ambitions just because a company takes a cut. Admittedly better content than streaming services most the time anyway.

    • PlantDadManGuy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I agree with you but it made me physically nauseous to click the button because I remember a time when YouTube was awesome and free from ads.

    • selokichtli@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Doesn’t seem like you bit any bullet, you just paid for your subscription giving money away. What’s the biting the bullet part for you?

      • TargaryenTKE@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Lol giving away money at all, especially to large monopolistic corporations like Google. They don’t need my money, they already have plenty

  • Microplasticbrain@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    This is the way, appeasement of ad producers doesn’t work.

    At some point number has to get bigger.

    Before you know it were paying for cable tv with ads again.

    • HasturInYellow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Except this time we won’t just be paying for the cable, we’ll be paying to get the ads you want, too. You’ll be paying for the DVR function or whatever they want.

      As with everything else it will continue to degrade and enrage it’s customers, and erode the entire country’s very will to live. I am truly curious just how detrimental it is for everyone in this country to be exposed to the THOUSANDS of small fully intentional annoyances daily that are built into every product and service. It has to be a leading cause of how angry and divided we are and is absolutely causing many early deaths. Everyone is so stressed out by every single thing they interact with.

  • anonymous111@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Is there a wiki for the best way to block ads per device type?

    I’ve figures it out on Fire Stick (I know) and Firefox but I have no experience installing android apps via root or developer mode.

    • PinkyCoyote@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      For android use either YouTube revanced or newpipe.

      Also there is the piracy megathread which will help you with that!

    • edinbruh@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Use YouTube revanced. It’s an app that patches the official YouTube apk. Basically you provide the version of the apk it requires (the patcher will tell you), select which patches you want (you can put all of them and disable what you don’t need in the settings later) and if will create a new apk without ads that you can install

  • Asafum@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I don’t believe for one single second that this will stay ad free. YouTube will eventually do like all the assholes do and have a tiered system where the first tier is simply less ads not none.

    • Feydaikin@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yep, eventually ads will creep their way into the payed system.

      At the end of the day, there’s no such thing as enough money for corporations.

    • Vespair@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Even when you aren’t seeing ads their algorithm is still controlling your front page, allowing them to push partner content that isn’t directly advertising but still acts like it. The differences between a commercial for Doritos and an episode of Good Mythical Morning titled “Trying Every Doritos Flavor” from the perspective of the PepsiCo marketing department are that people might willingly click on the GMM video and they probably didn’t even have to pay anyone for the video to happen.
      Sure Rhett & Link may not have a partnership with Pepsi and are just innocently making content to give their audience (I genuinely believe this), so they’ve got no part in this becoming advertising, but you would have to be incredibly naïve to believe that Google’s algorithm isn’t smart enough to recognize that video and others like it as marketable content the promotion of which can be sold to PepsiCo.

      Premium subscribers may not be seeing ads, but they are absolutely still seeing advertising.

      edit: typos

      • Asafum@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        That’s a good point, but to be honest even if those thumbnails were just straight up ads I’d be ok with that. I can simply not click on it. Having any kind of actual ad on a premium service is absolute bullshit though, that’s straight up greed…

        Hell as a free user I wouldn’t mind in the slightest having their segments: videos, segment for shorts, more videos, be broken up to have videos, ad banner, shorts, videos, and banner etc… don’t lock me into having to watch an ad but I do understand they need ad revenue and I don’t mind seeing the still image ads “of the past” (well past for me since I’ve used an ad blocker for-absolutly-ever now.)

  • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Or… do both. Buy premium because you are actually getting something for your money… a platform. And support ad blockers to stop the ads where the product is just a webpage.

    • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yeah. I’m actually okay with paying for a service I use daily. Google does a bunch of evil shit to drive its advertising business, but the reality is that nothing is free and somebody has to pay somewhere.

      We can pay with money or we can pay with ads and personal data.

      What I would like to see is a law banning data collection for paid accounts. Because right now Google datarapes you even when you pay.

        • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Wikipedia isn’t video hosting. The angles of nenual hosting cost for Wikipedia is around 3 million a year. YouTube probably costs nearly as much per hour to keep running.

          500 hours of video are uploaded to YouTube every minute. That’s gonna be like 60 terrabytes every hour just in storage space increases.

          If you were to try and host that on a cloud server like AWS the cost would increase millions of dollars every day. Google self-hosted, but it’s still unfathomingly expensive. There’s still questions over whether YouTube profitable even with all the ads and the subscriptions.

        • VirtualOdour@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Good loving people pay for it because they want it to be available to everyone in the world and it’s running costs are pretty low.

        • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          The economic reality is not everything can be free for everyone. Privacy is the price people pay to have “free” access to services.

          But right now, even those who pay to skip ads or have additional features on a service are still being mined for data.

          • Doomsider@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            I deny your economic reality. There is no reason social media needs to charge. It can be run purely on volunteers and donations. It may not be able to be as big as FB but that is okay. We don’t need giant multimedia companies running social media anyways.

            We need strong privacy protections for everyone, not just paying customers. It is time to put an end to targeted advertising.

            • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              We’re talking about video hosting here. For a hosting site like YouTube that’s several petabytes of new storage added every day assuming no duplicates or backups of anything, plus the bandwidth, overhead, staffing, and more.

              A project of that scale can’t be done by volunteer hobbyists with no money. What you’re asking for is for other people to work and spend billions annually without any expectation of compensation for just your entertainment, and you aren’t entitled to that.

              • Doomsider@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                Your inability to see the Internet as a distributed resource is astounding considering it’s purpose. I will repeat what I said before there is no reason social media can’t be done without the corporations controlling everything.

                You can easily host your own videos, if everyone did and we used advanced sharing protocols the load can be distributed. The more people watching the more bandwidth.

                You have become brainwashed into believing only YouTube can exist. You have bought into it so bad you think someone who wants your rights and privacy protected is a free loader.

                We can do at all without them. There is something wrong and perverse about a single entity controlling that much of our culture. Too big to fail you say, I say too big to care about what really matters.

                • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Okay, let’s go with your idea that everybody has the knowledge and hardware retired to self-host.

                  What happens when Grandma’s cute video she uploaded goes viral and 11 million people try to watch it in a 24hr period? Would we rather it simply didn’t work, or does grandma get an unexpected $7,000 bill?

      • amorangi@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        but the reality is that nothing is free and somebody has to pay somewhere.

        Youtube gained its market share and stopped any competitors arising by offering a free video platform. Now that there isn’t much hope for competition they have enshitified, plastering ads and demanding money. They endured massive loses for years just to kill competition. So boo fucking hoo when I continue using a monopolists products on the terms they originally offered.

      • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Selling personal data at all should just be banned. It says personal right in the name… Giving away free services with forced adds is exploitation in my opinion. The first step to solving the issue is to require everything have a paid option that gets rid of adds and doesn’t sell personal data for additional profit. The hard part with that is preventing them from just setting the price unreasonably high.

        • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I’d imagine there’s a point where the money from subscriptions is greater than the money from advertising and data hoarding.

          The “unreasonably high” prices should be self-solving in that context, because the company won’t make more money by selling ads for less than the price of a subscription.

          In fact, in order to justify raising the prices too much they’d have to change more for the ads, which in turn would hurt the ad industry by reducing the ROI in marketing.

      • HowManyNimons@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Exactly this. Funding google is a bad investment. Exactly like the comic says, give it to someone who will improve your life.

    • Lemmy Reddit That@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I would pay, if they would offer family pack in our country, but they don’t. Netflix is cheaper for me, I have Premium plan for 10€, and I am splitting the bill with my sister, so I only pay 5€ per month. I am not paying more than that for a YouTube.

  • Intrama@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’m on it daily. A ton of hours between watching videos and enjoying the music catalogue. It’s definitely the only reason I don’t mind paying premium. No complaints.

  • macniel@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    to really support them, buy merch, subscribe to their patreon, make a donation via kofi… there are so many more viable ways to actually support your content creator than YT+.

  • VinnyDaCat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    YouTube: Has ads and sells your data like every other online service Also YouTube: Doesn’t pay creators much to the point where creators often have in-video advertisements but expects audiences on the platform to pay for an adless experience

    • Chrobin@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      That’s not really correct. While yes, ads don’t pay great, this is generally the case, and maintaining servers with these amounts of data is really expensive. And with YouTube premium, actually, YouTubers get paid quite well. You can take a look at the LTT finances video. They make more money from premium than from YouTube ads, even though only a small fraction has it.

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

        Is LTT the rule or exception tho for that premium vs ads metric? LTT viewers are more on the nerdy side so more likely to have adblocking software. Not saying the data is wrong or anything, I just wonder how it fares on more general topics like cooking, fashion, travel etc.

  • umbraroze@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’ll get YouTube premium once they fix their damn TV app.

    • If I resume playing a video from history, it often plays the ads, then re-plays them shortly after. (You know, at the point when it hit me with a fucking 55 second ad and I backed out and said fuck no, are you shitting me. Double points if the ad it tries to play again is also ridiculously long. I just keep refreshing it until it gives me 5 seconds to skip. I’m not much of a gambler, but this much I can gamble.)

    Admittedly, this bug is not applicable to Premium. Being ad-skippy and all. But it’s indicative of the overall quality of the app. For example:

    • When long-holding a video in all circumstances, I it should give me a full menu. Like, with the “go to the channel” option? …doesn’t give that to me in Subscriptions view. This might come as a surprise to YouTube, but I don’t always like watching Whatever The Algorithm Feeds Me. I might, you know, choose to watch the 10 episodes I missed. To do that, I need to actually like to go to the channel in question.
    • …Or any of the channels I like or are particularly interested at the moment. There’s no way to pin this shit either.
    • Speaking of which, the fucking way to browse my subscriptions is fucking atrocious holy shit. It’s useless. This is Google. They don’t do user experience research. They half-ass everything.
    • On my smart TV, sometimes the buttons just fuck up. Sometimes I can’t control this shit. Because my TV operating system was designed by particularly deranged people, they thought “closing” or “restarting” any given app was space technology that no average consumer can understand, so they reduced that to bare minimums: the only way to restart the app is to pull the plug. This is just fucking demeaning.

    A collaboration between Google and Samsung, people! Two giant corps serving millions of users! And they expect us to pay monthly fee for this holy shit

    …sorry for the rant.

    • dafo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Tbf the only Android TV app I’ve used which is actually usable and has not-shit UX is SmartTube. Discovery Plus deserves a special place in hell.