• falsem@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    10 months ago

    From the same company that intentionally degrades the quality of Google Maps on Firefox.

  • Ranvier@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Comment from a ublock developer on this:

    There is a lot of chatter in the last days about how Youtube is slow with content blockers. Those performance issues affect only the latest version of both Adblock Plus (3.22) & AdBlock (5.17), and afflict more than just Youtube. uBO is not affected.

    https://twitter.com/gorhill/status/1746263759495077919

  • Quokka@quokk.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    10 months ago

    They were outright blocking it not long ago, so if they could still figure out who is doing it they’d probably just block them entirely again, right?

    • Yeldarb12@toast.ooo
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      10 months ago

      I think they saw it was kinda backfiring. If they make it inconvenient enough instead of impossible, people might give up? Or they are just trying to be dicks to people using ad blockers?

      • Quokka@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        39
        ·
        10 months ago

        But that does nothing unless they tell us they’re doing that.

        If I just see the service getting slow, I’m not going to “Oh this is because of my adblocker, better turn it off to go fast” I’m going to think “Fuck YT is turning to shit, it cant even load a page. I’ll go watch Twitch or something”

        • Yeldarb12@toast.ooo
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          I agree with you but not everyone has the same thought process as us. I’ve explained it to my entire family and I always end up “fixing it”. My family doesn’t care about alternatives because they dont like things to change. “Why learn something new when the old way still works?” My family’s thought process on these things just doesn’t make sense to me sometimes but it’s the conclusion they get to.

      • Big P
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I think YouTube could stop adblockers and ytdlp easy if they actually wanted it

    • jarfil@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Since they failed to kill yt-dl, and in the meantime people have built plenty of very easy to use solutions to completely bypass YouTube’s page, they may have finally realized that a nag screen with “subscribe for HD streaming” might be more effective than pushing even more people away.

  • TheBaldness@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    10 months ago

    I’m using Firefox w uBlock turned off for YouTube. It’s almost unusable for me. They’re not just degrading the experience of ad-blocking users. They’re also sabotaging users of non-Chrome web browsers.

    • YuzuDrink@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      10 months ago

      I have a 2Gbps internet connection, and at my desktop running Firefox, I can’t reliably stream anything fancier than 1080p60. In the next room on my TV with an AndroidTV box attached, 4K60 streams flawlessly.

      I never see ads because I pay for Premium, yet they still fuck me over.

    • Big P
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Are you thinking of the a/b test from a while back?

  • its_me_xiphos@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    Not an expert, but would our net neutrality rules that the supreme jerk Ajit Pai helped revoke have been a tool to combat this behavior?

    • jarfil@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      No.

      Net neutrality refers to prioritizing/throttling traffic between the provider and the client based on anything other than infrastructure limitations and QoS markings, to avoid a situation where client network providers could conspire with service providers to extort extra payments from clients.

      It says nothing about the provider deciding to throttle, or even completely block/ban, certain clients. That would be separate legislation, like the proposals to prevent “de-platforming” by major social networks (see how Threads avoided giving access to people in the EU until they enabled some integration with the Fediverse, to avoid getting accused of abuse of power).

  • butter@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    I don’t disagree?

    They’re going to try what they’re going to try. This won’t sway me, but it might sway someone. In which case, that user is subsidizing me

    • Big P
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      This one turned out to be the adblockers fault not YouTube. I think YouTube could end adblockers on their site in a day if they wanted to. I think their whole thing with the popups is more about adding FUD than actually blocking their use