Youtube let the other shoe drop in their end-stage enshittification this week. Last month, they required you to turn on Youtube History to view the feed of youtube videos recommendations. That seems reasonable, so I did it. But I delete my history every 1 week instead of every 3 months. So they don’t get much from my choices. It still did a pretty good job of showing me stuff I was interested in watching.

Then on Oct 1, they threw up a “You’re using an Ad Blocker” overlay on videos. I’d use my trusty Overlay Remover plugin to remove the annoying javascript graphic and watch what I wanted. I didn’t have to click the X to dismiss the obnoxious page.

Last week, they started placing a timer with the X so you had to wait 5 seconds for the X to appear so you could dismiss blocking graphic.

Today, there was a new graphic. It allowed you to view three videos before you had to turn off your Ad Blocker. I viewed a video 3 times just to see what happens.

Now all I see is this.

Google has out and out made it a violation of their ToS to have an ad blocker to view Youtube. Or you can pay them $$$.

I ban such sites from my systems by replacing their DNS name in my hosts file routed to 127.0.0.1 which means I can’t view the site. I have quite a few banned sites now.

  • db2@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    But I delete my history every 1 week instead of every 3 months. So they don’t get much from my choices.

    Implying that deleting them from your view actually deleted them.

        • luciferofastora@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          How can my workplace admin block Pornhub even when I’m using private mode? He shouldn’t even be allowed to see what I do privately!

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

            I mean, this is mostly borne from a fundamental misunderstanding of what “Private Browsing” mode is and was meant to be.

            When you open an incognito tab on Chrome, it literally says “Now you can browse privately, and other people who use this device won’t see your activity.

            It also says

            Your activity might still be visible to:

            • Websites that you visit
            • Your employer or school
            • Your Internet service provider

            Fuck using Chrome and I’m not defending Google at all here, but they never once claimed Incognito was anything more than it was.

            • luciferofastora@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Pretty sure Firefox says that too. Users just don’t read. Like, ever. They’ll get an error message saying “Important!” and click whatever button seems most likely to make it go away before calling support and demanding they “fix the computer”.

    • caesar_salad83@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      doesn’t even matter. what matters is the meta data. if the data from the list say you like science videos with emphasis on electrical engineering, star wars podcasts and mmorpg let’s plays - does that data go away apon history deletion. what about meta-meta data. if the meta data puts you on group X that receive content Y, does that go away apon history deletion. and what kind of integration does that get with the rest of the google knowledge about you…

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

    I just got this popup today too, but only in Brave, it doesn’t show up in Firefox and LibreWolf at all and I use uBlock Origin for all of them. Looks like it’s just a Chromium thing. I mainly use Firefox anyway, I only use Brave as a music player at work because I have too many FF tabs opened in 3 windows already.

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

    I just got this for the first time today. I was able to dismiss it and go on to watch ad blocked YouTube on Firefox, but I wonder how much longer this will be an option. Nebula and Curiosity Stream are looking really good right now.

  • Rolder@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Odd, I have uBlock Origin and it’s blocking the ads without any pop ups or angry messages

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

    uBlock Origin is quite apt in not showing any of that. I am thankful for the creator’s attentiveness.

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

      Greed, by definition, has no limits.

      What happens when they block adblockers? Do you think they’re just going to stop there? Or will they go from 3 ads every 10 minute to 4 ads every 10 minutes?

      Greed, by definition, has no limits.

      The solution to the problem is to have higher standards. But people with low standards get mad whenever that’s pointed out.

      They’re useful idiots for a reason.

  • BReel@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    “You can go ad free with YouTube premium!”

    Buys premium

    youtube shows ad for paramount plus under my video

    Cancels YouTube premium.

    So anywho there’s a thing called freetube. Just saying. Idk that it’s a perfect alternative, but it’s at least one step further from googles prying eyes and grubby hands.

  • jabathekek@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I just tried it out, watched three videos (one was 49 minutes) and nothing. I use Firefox with NoScript and U-Block (also Enhancer for Youtube, but I doubt that’s relevant). I wouldn’t have know this was happening if no one posted about it.

    • Happenchance@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes. In the same way that “Master” and “Slave” have been replaced for racist engineering terminology, “Whitelist” and “Blacklist” are replaced with “Allowlist” and “Blocklist”.

      • cactusupyourbutt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        it is not racist however. words get their meaning by their context. asking if you can bum a fag gets very different responses in the uk and outside

        in this case master 2a/d or 5 and I couldnt find any non people slavery related definition so maybe that should get changed after all

        • Chunk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          If you have ever said “Master Slave” architecture you are a racist and every single Black person in earshot had a panic attack. At least, that’s what we’re led to believe.

      • coffeeaddict@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Do these terms actually come from racist backgrounds, or did they come up as a coincidence?
        It just feels weird someone would think of a way to degrade black people then decide to use blacklist for things they don’t want, then engineers decide to use master and slave to piss off black people whatever. Is that literally the history behind it?

        • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Blacklist was specifically used to refer to the refusal of entry as if they were a black person, so yes there is a racist history. Master and Slave is pretty obvious why especially considering everyone uses Parent/Child and Primary/Secondary these days anyway. Like maybe 10% of the change was because of “je-I-mean-sjws being offended” and like 90% just practicality because they’re outdated terms that aren’t really used.

          • chakan2@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Lol…omg. lol.

            Phew.

            I’m sure Americans used blacklist like that at one time or another, but the origins are a list of enemies and had nothing to do with skin color.

            Master and Slave is also not something exclusive to black people, they’re generic terms that were appropriated.

  • chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’ll play devil’s advocate here… Ads pay revenue. Revenue pays for the service. The service pays content creators. I’m not saying Youtube is perfect, but adblocking, or using alternate front ends, hurts the content creators first. Youtube Premium gets rid of the ads, pays the content creators more, and gets you a spotify-type music streaming service as well. I’m not trying to shill, but the deal is pretty fair, it’s only $3 more than spotify, and you get 0 ads on youtube as a bonus. If you really don’t want to see and you don’t want to pay for it, then please, don’t use the service. Youtube still gets data from you, even if you block ads. You want to hurt them, then do it the right way. Blocking ads hurts the creators more than anyone else.

    Edit: Every day I am reminded of how many people believe they are owed everything for free.