108
Google could kill YouTube Vanced for good (www.androidpolice.com)
submitted 2 years ago by [M, B] to c/technology@lemmy.world
100 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Google could kill YouTube Vanced for good::The company is exploring an integrity API that could lock down WebViews with DRM

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -10 points 2 years ago (12 children)

That's not true. Do you think, say, coca cola cares if you click on ads? Not all ads are looking for clicks. Some just want to get impressions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 21 points 2 years ago (10 children)

    Yes it is true. They don't make an impression when I don't see it.

    Call me old fashioned, but I have hands. I physically put my phone away because I do not want to watch the screen on my phone when the screen is showing an ad instead of showing what I wanted to see.

    Companies are paying Google to show me ads that I don't see.

    Coca Cola's brand recognition does not come from YouTube ads. It comes from signs in the real world, visual merchandising in stores and product placement in shows.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    Absolutely. There are petrol pumps that play fucking ads. What do I do? Enter car. That’s horrifying to me.

    I haven’t had YouTube ads for a long time thanks to Firefox focus but if I did? I’d probably abandon the platform. Otherwise I’d just put my phone upside down for as long as the ad might be.

    You’re entirely correct. I refuse to ads. I wish billboards were illegal here. Ads are a fuck.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [+] -6 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    Ads on the internet are a consequence of people not wanting to pay for internet services.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    This is absolutely not true as Steam and other niche streaming sites have proven. When you make it easier to buy what you're selling, rather than doing everything in your power to nickel and dime consumers to pad your stock price, people are fine paying for those services and you don't need ads.

    Historically speaking, your statement is false, and there are multiple examples to prove it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    Then what's difficult about paying for YouTube Premium?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    they literally raise the price every other week do you think that's sustainable to keep paying for (which is saying yes please take more money each time you pay)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    No, they do not "literally raise the price every other week".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago

    This is only true for large, legacy companies like Coca Cola though. This doesn't work for startups shilling shitty headphones, flashlights, VPNs, mobile games, etc because you're unlikely to randomly come across their product when walking around the grocery store for example.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent