• tuckerm@supermeter.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    64
    ·
    16 days ago

    This may not work out the way I want it to, but I’m actually a little excited about these tech companies making a bunch of anti-consumer decisions all at once. So many mainstream users will be looking for alternatives, and it’s going to provide a great opportunity for non-profit open source projects. It’s already happening with the fediverse suddenly becoming a viable place for discussion in the last 1.5 years. After Windows Recall was announced, I’ve seen more people talking about switching to Linux than ever before. Part of me can’t wait for unskippable Youtube ads.

    • t3rmit3@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      44
      ·
      15 days ago

      People often decry accelerationism, but the reality is that the slow-boiled frog is the one that sits and dies. Chipping away at freedoms, consumer protections, product benefits, etc is all less likely to spark backlash than when they drop sharply in a short time.

      That doesn’t mean you should help to make things worse, but it does mean that you may want to reconsider constantly mitigating every bad thing that others are doing, rather than letting them shoot themselves in the foot. When people are being hurt, help them. When people are being inconvenienced, let them get angry.

      • noobdoomguy8658@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        15 days ago

        This looks like a very classical and well-known case of executives copying each other.

        That other company is doing layoffs and seems fine? Reports the line going up? Let’s do it, too!

        The guys across the street are already implementing AI? Investors love it? Let do it, too! We may have taken a risk with blockchain, but this one is just sure to work better for us!

        The big name is going for the money, predator-style, and they’re still afloat? Finally, we can cash out, too!

    • DeltaTangoLima@reddrefuge.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      15 days ago

      We need Cory to coin a term for what comes after enshittification. Perhaps we can call it the Great Wipening, where we all stop paying to be treated like serfs and start taking back control of our content and data.

      • renard_roux@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        15 days ago

        You missed an S in enShittification.

        And I completely agree, Cory seems to be good at coining terms and making them stick 👍

      • prole@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        14 days ago

        No we don’t, we have 400+ years of capitalist history to tell us what comes next; Oligarchy, neo-feudalism…

        People: Cory Doctorow didn’t invent this concept. Read a book.

        • DeltaTangoLima@reddrefuge.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          13 days ago

          The whole point of this particular comment thread here is that we’re already starting to see what’s happening: people are taking back control. You’re here on Lemmy, proving that exact point.

          I never said we needed Cory to tell us what comes next. Just come up with another colourfully descriptive term like he did with enshittification.

          You sound like that insufferable ponytail from Good Will Hunting.

  • Feyter@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    16 days ago

    Of course they do. They want to keep control over monetization. They don’t care about creators at all.

  • smeg@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    15 days ago

    TL;DW: the ads will be in the video stream itself which will mess up timestamps, sponsor block uses timestamps to know when the ads are.

    Seems to me that this will also break every other use case of specific times like direct linking to a timestamp of a video, right?

    • Alice@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      15 days ago

      This sucks for so many. People use timestamps for content warnings or to help viewers avoid spoilers. Commenters use timestamps when talking about the content of the video. It’s insane to change this once it’s so ingrained in how people use the website.

      • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        14 days ago

        It’s also how content creators literally create chapters: put the time codes into the video description

        That’s a native feature of the platform

      • smeg@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        15 days ago

        Hopefully they’ll realise it’s a bigger breaking change than they wanted as part of this testing phase

          • smeg@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            15 days ago

            Yeah I do. They still want to be able to sell their premium subscriptions and not every engineer working on the product is some soulless corpo. If they can break all adblockers without damaging their product they will, but if it fucks things up too much then they’ll go back to the drawing board and try something else.

    • Ænima@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      15 days ago

      I’d imagine YouTube subtracts the ad length from posted timestamps when clicking a link containing one. But we are taking about Google, soooooo…

        • Ænima@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          15 days ago

          In the cat and mouse game, the cat can adjust tactics but the mice eventually figure out an alternative route. I’m sure they will find a way with this. Either that or a lot of people will just stop watching YouTube, I’d imagine.

          • ahornsirup@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            15 days ago

            A truly shocking number of people don’t use any form of adblock. I doubt that driving off the adblock users will have a significant effect on viewership (and even if it does, why would Google care, it’s not like we’re making them money).

    • prole@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      It will end up being like FreeVee on Prime for anyone who’s ever watched a movie or anything on there. They straight up randomly just inject ads in at random times, often not even during scene breaks. Characters are sometimes mid-sentence… Oh, and we’re back to the volume of the ads being 2x louder than the movie itself because I guess that law Congress passed way back in the day only applied to cable and broadcast TV.

      It makes it nearly unwatchable. So get ready for that experience.

  • Mechanize@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    16 days ago

    I find it funny that this is the first video where I’m consistently getting the “This helps us protect our community” and “Log in to confirm that you are not a bot” errors while using an alternative Frontend.

    I’m sure it’s just a random coincidence, but it is still funny to me.

  • JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    14 days ago

    And yet, despite everyone complaining, YouTube knows damn well no one is going to stop using their shit so they’ll continue to do whatever they want.

    Maybe people should just…. Stop using YouTube. That or don’t complain when they fuck over the content creators and users of their platform.

            • scbasteve7@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              14 days ago

              If you don’t use YouTube, you’re also screwing over the content creators you enjoy. You can cause harm to a company in many ways. Stop using a site prevents them from making money off of you. Preventing them from actively making money off of you while you’re still using the site actively takes money away from them. It is double sided sword because you’re also not actively supporting that content creator. However, if they don’t have another platform to post on, you can instead buy merch, donate, or simply help the algorithm boost their content by watching their content.

              I don’t disagree with you. YouTube should no longer be a viable business. Something else should step in and rival them. But since that doesn’t look like it’s going to happen, I’ll be happy running adblocks, and letting them not recoup their server and operation costs from me.

              • JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                13 days ago

                Imagine if- now bear with me… seriously, Imagine if…. everyone stopped using YouTube.

          • JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            14 days ago

            So… you’ll complain about, but use it anyway thereby supporting what they’re doing.

            Gotcha.

    • Sina@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      14 days ago

      I’ll just use invidious, it’s a bit of a chore to use, but it’s increasingly worth it.

  • jaschen@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    13 days ago

    My brother in law says he likes commercials when I offered to remove it. They are over indexing this.