Youtube ads

[Athlonite]

Yup for a while I didn't see any notices about ad blocking but for the last three days I've been seeing this as soon as I start to play a video

From what I've heard it's not a blanket roll out to everyone all at once but it's getting done in dribs n drabs

Solution (worked for me) :
uninstall every adblocker but ublock (youtube enhancer also)
and put this code in the "My Filters" page
code:

youtube.com##+js(set, yt.config_.openPopupConfig.supportedPopups.adBlockMessageViewModel, false)

youtube.com##+js(set, Object.prototype.adBlocksFound, 0)

youtube.com##+js(set, ytplayer.config.args.raw_player_response.adPlacements, [])

youtube.com##+js(set, Object.prototype.hasAllowedInstreamAd, true)

this didn't work for me

 

[unwind-protect]

"allowlisted"

 

[Bill_Bright]

I got free coffee from McDonald the other day and my local cafe, i can't complaint about that

LOL Yeah, National Coffee Day was a couple weeks ago. Dunkin' Donuts did it too. Of course they got their money back from the donut sales.

There's a difference between paying 5 quid for a Big Mac, and paying 15, doing two questionnaires and listening to a 2-minute speech from the local WHO representative before you can eat it.

Yes, there is a HUGE difference between paying £5 once for one Big Mac, and paying £15 for 30 days of 24 hour access and all the Big Macs you can eat!

There's also a big difference between paying £5 or £15, and paying nothing yet still getting the Big Mac.

Look - I don't like ads any more than anyone else here. And I agree with Lex and you that some of the ads are "a bit too much" and perhaps even objectionable. And I certainly don't like corporate greed.

But NOBODY IS FORCING US TO WATCH YOUTUBE VIDEOS!!! We don't NEED to watch YouTube videos to survive, to feed and safely shelter our families.

Companies are entitled and even expected to earn revenue on the products and services they create and provide. WE ARE NOT ENTITLED to those products or services for free nor does it automatically make them "money hungry bastards" because they don't give their products or services away for free.

Even non-profit organizations need revenue.

Similarly, if I have to watch an ad or two before my video to avoid paying for premium, fair enough. But being interrupted every 5 minutes with two 15-20-second ads that can't be skipped is a little bit too much.

I couldn't agree more. So I don't watch YouTube. No one is forcing you to either.

We have choices. Pay, watch with ads, or don't watch at all.

...that. You may not have directly said it, but you implied it

No where, except in your head, does objecting to those who criticize a company that doesn't give them their products for free when they stick their hands out, imply ads should be blocked. No where, except in your head, did I say ads should not be blocked. In fact, I said, multiple times, I use AdGuard to block ads. So this is you, once again, just making stuff up. So please stop, and just move on.

 

[Deleted member 229121]

I'd be ok paying to remove the ads if Google was even remotely reasonable about it.
The site is traditionally free, charge people $5-6 / Mo to remove the adds, simple.

But no - instead we get forced to pay for YT Music in a quite frankly, shit bundle...

 

[Bill_Bright]

Yeah, bundles. That's another issue too. With my cable company, I have to pay extra for a bundle that has 28 channels I never watch - just to get the 2 channels I want.

 

[Deleted member 229121]

It's pretty ridiculous. YT Music accounts for 78% of the annual cost ($140) for YT Premium

 

[bug]

I'd be ok paying to remove the ads if Google was even remotely reasonable about it.
The site is traditionally free, charge people $5-6 / Mo to remove the adds, simple.

But no - instead we get forced to pay for YT Music in a quite frankly, shit bundle...

And that's despite users repeatedly telling them music does not belong together with videos. They decided to do it anyway, I decided to unsubscribe.

 

[iameatingjam]

Damn. I use the Brave browser and it blocks ads automatically. I haven't been affected yet... hopefully I wont be. No way I'm paying for youtube premium.

 

[AVATARAT]

Companies are entitled and even expected to earn revenue on the products and services they create and provide. WE ARE NOT ENTITLED to those products or services for free nor does it automatically make them "money hungry bastards" because they don't give their products or services away for free.

You are right, but not entirely.

Some services rely on the number of people that use it.
If youtube becomes fully paid, its popularity will drop dramatically. So they made it "free" with ads because they need as much of us as they can get.
In the beginning, there was only one ads for a few seconds when the video started and not before each but from time to time, today there are 2-3 ads at the start before most of the videos and some during the video.
A long time ago was pointless to use blockers, but now they become so greedy they just got what they worked for.

If they are gone, we will find just next similar services, but if we drop them, there is a really high chance they to close their doors.
So do we need youtube or do they need us is a bit tricky to say

 

[AusWolf]

I couldn't agree more. So I don't watch YouTube. No one is forcing you to either.

We have choices. Pay, watch with ads, or don't watch at all.

Or watch with AdBlock. That's my choice.

Yes, there is a HUGE difference between paying £5 once for one Big Mac, and paying £15 for 30 days of 24 hour access and all the Big Macs you can eat!

There's also a big difference between paying £5 or £15, and paying nothing yet still getting the Big Mac.

Look - I don't like ads any more than anyone else here. And I agree with Lex and you that some of the ads are "a bit too much" and perhaps even objectionable. And I certainly don't like corporate greed.

But NOBODY IS FORCING US TO WATCH YOUTUBE VIDEOS!!! We don't NEED to watch YouTube videos to survive, to feed and safely shelter our families.

Companies are entitled and even expected to earn revenue on the products and services they create and provide. WE ARE NOT ENTITLED to those products or services for free nor does it automatically make them "money hungry bastards" because they don't give their products or services away for free.

Even non-profit organizations need revenue.

Except that I don't eat £15 worth of Big Mac in a month - it's probably the wrong example.

You're right, every organisation needs revenue, but how they generate it is their choice, and what I do about it (accept it, refuse it, or use AdBlock) is mine. Forcing ads in your face every 5 minutes isn't the only way to make money.

Edit: If a company's message to me is "look how annoying I am if you don't give me money", then my response is "look, I can be annoying too".

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

You know, when TV was over the air commercials made sense. You got "free" content that was advertised.
Cable was...decent. The cable company was paid for infrastructure and the commercials on channels supported the content along with a revenue share with the cable company.

The thing is, I'm now paying for my internet. I'm then paying for Youtube by having my personal data scraped and having ads sent to me in millions of different places....along with preferential searches produced to sell goods. Some people moan that "I don't have to watch youtube," while others moan that this absolutely isn't fair. I'm looking at this as an entirely different problem.



To elaborate, Tivo was around for years before they started allowing you to skip commercials. Netflix was around for quite some time in the streaming market before they started being more than a commercial free content host. Both were services I've gladly paid for in my lifetime...and that demonstrated either patience or focusing on older content was plenty profitable. My greatest problem with Youtube is than 99.99% of their content is delivered by somebody else, at no cost to them. They retain DMCA protection, but can basically profit from anything that they want. As such, they are basically charging us for viewing content they host from other creators with no obligation to pay them for any of the content that they create, while profiting from advertising.
Netflix, Amazon, Disney, Hulu, and HBO make sense to have a premium/cheap with commercials option. They create and curate content. The problem is that with there being no central storehouse of content, as Netflix was back in the day, you are back to the worst bit of everything because everybody wanted a slice of the Netflix money. That's...depressing but predictable. What is unforgivable is that Youtube doesn't create content. If they did we'd have a very different discussion...but for now I'm not paying google a penny when they are already selling me as a product to make their money...and there's no hiding that behind the youtube name whilst Alphabet makes money hand over fist.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Companies are entitled and even expected to earn revenue on the products and services they create and provide.

Sure, no one is saying they are not. What they are NOT entitled to do is intrude upon our privacy. What they are NOT entitled to do is deluge users with mountains of ads that intrude upon the very content we're trying to enjoy. What they are NOT entitled to do is show us ads that are inappropriate. They do all of these things and ALL of it is NOT ok.

WE ARE NOT ENTITLED to those products or services for free

We ARE entitled to personal security. We ARE entitled to BLOCK anything that might intrude upon our privacy and security. We ARE entitled to block anything we find objectionable. We ARE entitled to block those things WITHOUT surrendering the ability to watch/listen to that which brought us to YouTube.

nor does it automatically make them "money hungry bastards" because they don't give their products or services away for free.

It does when they stoop to the level of showing disruptive ads every 4 or 5 minutes and frequently show inappropriate ads while doing it.

No where, except in your head, does objecting to those who criticize a company that doesn't give them their products for free when they stick their hands out, imply ads should be blocked. No where, except in your head, did I say ads should not be blocked. In fact, I said, multiple times, I use AdGuard to block ads. So this is you, once again, just making stuff up.

Moose muffins. This is you doubling down while trying(and failing) to cover your silly twaddle. How shocking..../s

So please stop, and just move on.

You first Darkwing.

You know, when TV was over the air commercials made sense. You got "free" content that was advertised.

Exactly! You can't block it, but it's high regulated so the chance of it being inappropriate nonsense is very, very low. Nor does it intrude upon a viewers privacy by tracking user activities. They also only show ads every 9 minutes or so(still too frequent, but it's better than YT).

 

[bug]

You know, when TV was over the air commercials made sense. You got "free" content that was advertised.
Cable was...decent. The cable company was paid for infrastructure and the commercials on channels supported the content along with a revenue share with the cable company.

The thing is, I'm now paying for my internet. I'm then paying for Youtube by having my personal data scraped and having ads sent to me in millions of different places....along with preferential searches produced to sell goods. Some people moan that "I don't have to watch youtube," while others moan that this absolutely isn't fair. I'm looking at this as an entirely different problem.



To elaborate, Tivo was around for years before they started allowing you to skip commercials. Netflix was around for quite some time in the streaming market before they started being more than a commercial free content host. Both were services I've gladly paid for in my lifetime...and that demonstrated either patience or focusing on older content was plenty profitable. My greatest problem with Youtube is than 99.99% of their content is delivered by somebody else, at no cost to them. They retain DMCA protection, but can basically profit from anything that they want. As such, they are basically charging us for viewing content they host from other creators with no obligation to pay them for any of the content that they create, while profiting from advertising.
Netflix, Amazon, Disney, Hulu, and HBO make sense to have a premium/cheap with commercials option. They create and curate content. The problem is that with there being no central storehouse of content, as Netflix was back in the day, you are back to the worst bit of everything because everybody wanted a slice of the Netflix money. That's...depressing but predictable. What is unforgivable is that Youtube doesn't create content. If they did we'd have a very different discussion...but for now I'm not paying google a penny when they are already selling me as a product to make their money...and there's no hiding that behind the youtube name whilst Alphabet makes money hand over fist.

Another one that thinks worldwide content delivery networks grow on trees...

 

[lexluthermiester]

Another one that thinks worldwide content delivery networks grow on trees...

Why?

 

[bug]

Why?

Because he thinks payment should be restricted to those that own the content. Hence the job of storing, transcoding and serving the content must come for free.

 

[Bill_Bright]

You're right, every organisation needs revenue, but how they generate it is their choice, and what I do about it (accept it, refuse it, or use AdBlock) is mine.

I agree, it is our choice. So I choose not to watch YouTube if at all possible. But if there is something I really want to watch, as I have said many times now, I block ads with AdGuard. Everyone has the same options.

Forcing ads in your face every 5 minutes isn't the only way to make money.

I agree. But sadly it seems to work. And it works because consumers put up with it. And no only do they put up with the ads, they are clicking on them or else companies would not be spending chunks of their ad budget with YouTube. If consumers would stop using YouTube (again, YouTube is NOT an essential service) and if consumers would stop clicking on ads, that way of making money would most likely go away.

What they are NOT entitled to do is intrude upon our privacy.

And NO WHERE did I EVER say YouTube is entitled to do that. Yet here you are, falsely implying I did, then arguing with me and criticizing me with puerile personal insults over something I never said.

Neither the opening OP's post nor any of my posts in this thread said, suggested, inferred or implied anything about YouTube violating or intruding upon our security or privacy. So yeah, you are [still] arguing with some imaginary person in your head you think is me, but is not me. Sad.

We ARE entitled to BLOCK anything that might intrude upon our privacy and security.

Who said we aren't. No me! Again, and for the 5th or 6th time now, I block ads. I use AdGuard to do it. So again, you are just arguing with your own ego up there.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Because he thinks payment should be restricted to those that own the content. Hence the job of storing, transcoding and serving the content must come for free.

You might have misunderstood what they were saying.

So yeah, you are [still] arguing with some imaginary person in your head you think is me, but is not me. Sad.

No, what's sad is that, as usual, you're missing context. Can't help you there.

So again, you are just arguing with your own ego up there.

Yup, that's gotta be it.

 

[Bill_Bright]

as usual, you're missing context.

I am not missing context - you are making up context that never existed - until you created it out of nothing. I've tried over the years, but alas, I can't help you there because you refuse to accept you could possible make a mistake, thus you keep doing it.

So I give. Have a good day and good luck. I will not waste my, or fellow readers time responding to you here again, unless it has something to do with the OP's issue.

 

[A&P211]

I use firefox with ublock origin and SponsorBlock for YouTube. Sponsorblock will skip most of the parts that have sponsorships within the video if other people have reported it.
SponsorBlock for YouTube doesnt always work but for me it works about 95% of the time.

​

 

[AVATARAT]

Another one that thinks worldwide content delivery networks grow on trees...

Or maybe you are the one that do not understand or know how the "free" model work

I will try to explain it.

The "free" services are based on popularity, most users get the things free, the fewer users will pay so much that the services will get more money than if it have a monthly fee.

So if the service's popularity drops it will lose this part that is agreed to pay for it.

So with "blockers" we still use youtube and its popularity has not dropped, the next step for us is to find the next competition, and then youtube will face the problem with their ads but will be too late

And don't worry, history is full of companies that thought that they were bigger/stronger than their customers

 

[plat]

I got the complete block of video playbacks/YouTube on Firefox latest browser. Like @iameatingjam in post #108, I installed Brave browser specifically to avoid YouTube's latest gimme. But that's not fully convenient.

If anyone is interested, I searched and came up with a guide on ghacks that will (for now) circumvent that block on video playbacks. It worked for me. Hopefully, it'll work for others too. Basically, it involves disabling all lists in uBO except the five built-ins. I also left UBO's annoyances list and Peter Lowe's tracking list enabled and these had no effect on the effectiveness of the workaround. If this was posted earlier, I apologize and did scan the first five pages to check.

Don't know how long this workaround will be good for, but if you are annoyed with YouTube's increased aggressiveness against ad-blockers, it's something to try. As a trillionaire corporation, I guess there must always be mo' money.

YouTube is cracking down on ad blockers more aggressively, here's how to bypass it - gHacks Tech News

Tired of seeing YouTube's anti-adblocker prompt? We show you how to bypass it with the uBlock Origin extension.

www.ghacks.net

Edit: after testing a little bit, I was getting too many empty spaces on sites like Yahoo. I went ahead and also enabled EasyList back and this worked to remove the spaces for ads on that site. YouTube still loaded as usual. Again, who knows how long this will work but for now, I'm good with it.

 

[the54thvoid]

Hey folks, I'm going to get right to the point.

No matter what your opinion is about YT and Google using adverts for revenue, and how they do it, they OP is seeking ideas on how to make ad-blockers work.

Please try and help with that. No more personal crusades about the rights and wrongs. The old adage runs true on this rapidly deteriorating thread - opinions are like arseholes - everybody's got one.

Technical help only. Thanks.

 

[R-T-B]

If you mean that TPU is just a random forum, this is a little sad.

It's completely powerless in regards to youtube policy, is what he means I think.

Technical help only. Thanks.

I use ublock origin +firefox. Its worked for me as of late. But I don't watch a ton of youtube either.

 

[Easy Rhino]

Most of the people who will complain about being forced to watch ads will still continue to use youtube. They are the addicted ones and Google knows that.

 

[P4-630]

But I don't watch a ton of youtube either.

Me neither, also using adblocker extensions on chrome here, no issues watching a video sofar....