Technology

59593 readers

3584 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

620

YouTube looks to be testing server-side ad injection to counter ad blockers (9to5google.com)

submitted 5 months ago by AnActOfCreation@programming.dev to c/technology@lemmy.world

235 comments fedilink hide all child comments

YouTube is testing server-side ad injection to counter ad blockers, integrating ads directly into videos to make them indistinguishable from the main content.
This new method complicates ad blocking, including tools like SponsorBlock, which now face challenges in accurately identifying and skipping sponsored segments.
The feature is currently in testing and not widely rolled out, with YouTube encouraging users to subscribe to YouTube Premium for an ad-free experience.

(page 3) 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] monobot@lemmy.ml 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I always wondered why they haven't been doing it from the start, seams like it is not as simple as I imagine.

People will take it, there is no other option and G is working hard not to allow another video platform.

Problem is ads they are playing are awful and loud. We will make way to silent them and black them out, it is not hard.

Bigger problem is content they are pushing is getting bad and is pushing creators into burnout. And I don't want to see videos companies are creating, but want individual contributions.

[–] GreatDong3000@lemm.ee 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

They probably had this ready to go a long time ago. It is just heavier on their servers so it costs more. Likely they had a number in mind about how many users would have to be using ad-blockers before rolling this out, to balance costs.

[–] clubb@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago

I am experiencinf this. The ads are unskippable, and they replace the video until they end

[–] HexesofVexes@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Now here's a thought - what if the real workaround Google are using here is targeting only non manifest V3 users?

That would reduce the cost of doing this, since chrome users are already forced to swallow ads and could just be served as normal.

[–] mint_tamas@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Firefox also implements manifest v3, just without the user-hostile restrictions.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] mercano@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago (4 children)

I don’t get why so many people begrudge YouTube for trying make money. They serve up 5TB of video data every second. Somebody’s got to pay for all of that. They know ads suck, that’s why they sell no ad subscriptions.

[–] snooggums@midwest.social 7 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Google used investor funding to create youtube at a loss for years to crush any competition, so we should be mad that there isn't an easy option to just switch to a comparable alternative.

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] Usernameblankface@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago

Reloading usually works, but gets old.

Mobile Firefox seems to still work

This is really putting a dent in my enjoyment of YouTube

load more comments