▲ 1193 ▼ YouTube is Losing The War Against Adblockers (www.howtogeek.com) submitted 2 years ago by AnActOfCreation@programming.dev to c/technology@lemmy.world 445 comments fedilink hide all child comments YouTube is intensifying efforts to combat adblockers, including blocking video playback and warning users of potential account suspension. Increased ads on YouTube have driven many users to adblockers, hurting both YouTube’s ad revenue and content creators reliant on ad-based income. Despite these measures, many users are leaving YouTube or finding workarounds, leading creators to seek alternative revenue streams off-platform.
[+] nobleshift@lemmy.world 84 points 2 years ago (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] legion02@lemmy.world 23 points 2 years ago Patreon and sites like it exist as a hedge against YouTube banning your channel. permalink fedilink source parent [–] echodot@feddit.uk 14 points 2 years ago (2 children) I would love it but I don't see it. It costs an enormous amount of money to host video content, doubly so when you need to replicate it across servers. I have never seen another company come close to usurping them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago Yeah, The problem is, the price on YouTube is so incredibly expensive because we have to pay for a million script kiddies worth of useless videos to be uploaded and permanently stored everyday. If someone made a competing system where you had to pay a small amount to host a video and then it turned around and paid you once you've got enough eyeballs that would be a far more sustainable model and cause people to police their old underperforming content. permalink fedilink source parent [–] stoly@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago I agree. We don’t get a new YouTube, we get whatever comes after YouTube—some new modality. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Delta_V@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (1 child) I think its more likely that YouTube will shut down and be replaced by nothing. Its existence has never made sense as anything but an act of charity from an organization with tech resources to burn. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stoly@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago (1 child) Remember that Google bought YouTube only AFTER it was successful for several years. This was also before Google turned evil. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jorp@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) There are a lot of unprofitable startups that get purchased speculatively based on other factors like their user count. The idea being the buyer thinks they can monetize. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stoly@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago* This was more like a merger with Google being the larger company. YouTube was already very successful. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] legion02@lemmy.world 23 points 2 years ago Patreon and sites like it exist as a hedge against YouTube banning your channel. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 14 points 2 years ago (2 children) I would love it but I don't see it. It costs an enormous amount of money to host video content, doubly so when you need to replicate it across servers. I have never seen another company come close to usurping them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago Yeah, The problem is, the price on YouTube is so incredibly expensive because we have to pay for a million script kiddies worth of useless videos to be uploaded and permanently stored everyday. If someone made a competing system where you had to pay a small amount to host a video and then it turned around and paid you once you've got enough eyeballs that would be a far more sustainable model and cause people to police their old underperforming content. permalink fedilink source parent [–] stoly@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago I agree. We don’t get a new YouTube, we get whatever comes after YouTube—some new modality. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago Yeah, The problem is, the price on YouTube is so incredibly expensive because we have to pay for a million script kiddies worth of useless videos to be uploaded and permanently stored everyday. If someone made a competing system where you had to pay a small amount to host a video and then it turned around and paid you once you've got enough eyeballs that would be a far more sustainable model and cause people to police their old underperforming content. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] stoly@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago I agree. We don’t get a new YouTube, we get whatever comes after YouTube—some new modality. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Delta_V@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (1 child) I think its more likely that YouTube will shut down and be replaced by nothing. Its existence has never made sense as anything but an act of charity from an organization with tech resources to burn. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stoly@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago (1 child) Remember that Google bought YouTube only AFTER it was successful for several years. This was also before Google turned evil. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jorp@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) There are a lot of unprofitable startups that get purchased speculatively based on other factors like their user count. The idea being the buyer thinks they can monetize. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stoly@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago* This was more like a merger with Google being the larger company. YouTube was already very successful. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] stoly@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago (1 child) Remember that Google bought YouTube only AFTER it was successful for several years. This was also before Google turned evil. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jorp@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) There are a lot of unprofitable startups that get purchased speculatively based on other factors like their user count. The idea being the buyer thinks they can monetize. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stoly@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago* This was more like a merger with Google being the larger company. YouTube was already very successful. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jorp@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) There are a lot of unprofitable startups that get purchased speculatively based on other factors like their user count. The idea being the buyer thinks they can monetize. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stoly@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago* This was more like a merger with Google being the larger company. YouTube was already very successful. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] stoly@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago* This was more like a merger with Google being the larger company. YouTube was already very successful. permalink fedilink source parent