YouTube Says New 5-Second Video Load Delay Is Supposed to Punish Ad Blockers, Not Firefox Users
stopthatgirl7@kbin.social to 
404media.co
Firefox users are reporting an 'artificial' load time on YouTube videos. YouTube says it's part of a plan to make people who use adblockers "experience suboptimal viewing, regardless of the browser they are using."
You are viewing a single comment
I don't mind ads, I understand that websites need to finance themselves to cover their costs (and maybe build up some capital to expand). But I do mind tracking, user profiling, personalization / user targeting, trading this data with dubious companies worldwide, and obnoxious ads, for example pop-ups or auto-play videos with a 1 micron sized close button, or a forced timed ad which is hiding the content.
It's like having a bunch of people following you around, taking note of everything you do, evaluating that data, making statistics, dicsussing it with other people you don't know, etc.. Then, when you want to make yourself a sandwich, step in between you and your sandwich, taking up a megaphone and scream into your face : "OH, WE NOTICED THAT YOU ARE MAKING A SANDWICH. CAN WE INTERST YOU IN NEW FANCY BUTTER KNIVES FOR ONLY 59,99 €?" [Then going on about it for 3 minutes before they are stepping out of your way].
There are laws against that in real life, and in the digital realm this is missing. Considering how much time a lot of people spend online this is something which needs to be taken seriously.
It's really scary sometimes. There was a time when I was stupid enough to use facebook, just to stay in touch with friends. Once I talked with a friend about allergies and asthma, and I told them I have a pollen allergy. A short time later an ad showed up on my facebook feed, advertising some nasal spray for allergies. Wtf?! And that's just the surface. "Harmless" ads. Who knows what else happens with that data?
And then we get stuff like Cambridge Analytica.
Personally, I do mind ads. They exist purely to convince people to buy stuff. In most cases, they are dishonest, or at the very least present the products in a favorable manner that hides flaws people might deserve to know. And even good ads are a distraction from what I actually want to see or do.
I completely agree, ad companies have taken user tracking too far. It is absolutely scary how much ad companies know about my private life, and there's no realistic way to stop them. We really need better legislation.
The ad company does not actually know anything about you or your life. That's an illusion.
Look up resources on helping someone with an addiction of any sort and watch the avalanche of ads for alcohol and such :( that's one of the darker "harmless" ads I've heard of. It's disgusting.
I find this so weird. Like, I want the exact literal opposite of what you want - I want personalized ads about shit I might conceivably click on.
I want usable personalized internet that knows where I am and offers me local deals and hotspots.
The hell are you so afraid of? Honestly?
The ads are not necessarily for things that are helpful to you, they are for things that other people want you to spend money on. There's a big difference.
The entire point of ads is that they target the middle part of that venn diagram.
I cannot imagine being dumb enough to buy something you're not interested in just because an ad popped up. An entire industry exists because that so rarely happens
Unfortunately, you're misinterpreting the purpose of advertising. What you and I expect, logically, is what I used to teach the kids I trained back when I worked at a fish market. I told them, "Your job isn't to convince the customer that they want something. They already know what they want. Your job is to use your knowledge to inform them so they buy what they need instead of getting what they think they need."
However, this isn't traditionally what advertising is for. Traditional advertising is about taking a shotgun to that Venn Diagram and blowing a hole through the entire circle because it's cheaper and easier, and will grab people from outside the middle too. Take Coca-Cola, for example. Everybody knows what Coke is, they have no need to advertise to make people aware of their product. They could save billions by not advertising and people would still know who they are and what they sell. The reason that they put so much money into advertising every year, plastering their logo on billboards and TV commercials and the like, is because they want to plant their product into your subconscious. They don't expect you to see an ad for Coke and go out and buy some, though they'd love it if you would; what they want is the next time you go to buy groceries or order food at a restaurant, you're going to get a Coke since their product is in the back of your mind. Car ads are about making you remember that clever ad you saw the next time you're planning on getting a car so you'll buy their brand. Not on the merits of the cars themselves but on the ad sticking in your mind. It's easier to get somebody to buy something based on them remembering a catchy jingle on the radio than to convince them that your product is better than the competitors. Shops like Temu are based entirely on getting you to buy stuff you're not interested in, simply because "it's such a good deal!" and if you don't buy it now, you'll miss out on the savings!
Targeted ads are just about increasing the likelihood that you'll view an ad by making that process more efficient, often by violating your privacy as an individual. Advertisers don't pay per clickthrough, they pay per view. As far as platforms like YouTube and Facebook are concerned, you're the product that they're selling to the companies, and tracking everything you do is just about finding the right companies to sell you to. You being happy with a purchase is just a side effect of that transaction. It's why if you look up technology patents, you'll find stuff like televisions designed to track your eyes to make sure you're actually watching the ads or prevent you from muting the TV during ads. This is why Google is cracking down on adblockers so hard right now. People who use adblockers are statistically less likely to click on an ad than people who don't. But YouTube doesn't care about that. They care that those people aren't viewing ads and therefore they can't charge advertisers for those views, even though forcing people with adblockers to see ads would actually reduce companies clickthrough rates so they'd be paying YouTube more for less. Ironically, it's in both advertisers and people who use adblockers best interest to prevent Google from ruining adblockers.
So you want to constantly be a slave to your consumerist impulses as you uncritically consume everything thrown at you, despite all the evidence that these companies can literally manipulate your perception of reality through targeted political advertising and echo chambers? Enjoy your terrifying dystopia, but at least you think you're getting a 'local deal' so who cares, right?
Holy shit dude what happens to you when you see an ad??
You need to inform yourself about advertising. Go and look up Edward Bernays. You literally can't stop ads affecting you, except by eliminating them. You think you're being a critical consumer, but you're right where they want you.
I know more about advertising than you do man, sorry
That's pretty presumptive. And pretty unlikely as you've shown yourself to be very naive about how advertising works. If you have any qualifications in it, your initial confusion shouldn't have been there.
Filter bubbles are one thing, which I find is a huge disadvantage to personalization. You'll never learn about new stuff, because it will never be presented to you, since someone assumes that you blong to a specific box.
Another is that I value my privacy. It's no one's business what I do, when, where, with whom and how. Apart from that, there is no guarantee that this information is not being misused.
For example, I'm thinking about political campaigns, which target specific user groups on the one hand, or spread misinformation and distrust to others. I see such forms of information steering as detrimental to democratic societies. Free and unbiased information is crucial for critical thinking.