Technology

59223 readers

3221 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

1690

YouTube Says New 5-Second Video Load Delay Is Supposed to Punish Ad Blockers, Not Firefox Users (www.404media.co)

submitted 11 months ago by stopthatgirl7@kbin.social to c/technology@lemmy.world

406 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 171 points 11 months ago (4 children)

Given that Google's been talking about switching Chrome to a new plugin format that would limit the ability of adblockers to function on Chrome, and given that Google owns Youtube and profits from the ads Youtube displays...

Nope, I'm not connecting the dots. Not sure why Google would be wanting people switch from Firefox to Chrome at this time.

[–] ElleChaise@kbin.social 63 points 11 months ago (4 children)

It's more obvious than that even; their SEC paperwork states that adblockers are a risk to their profits. That's more than enough info to assume they're going to go to war in the near future (now) with them.

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 38 points 11 months ago

They've always been at war with ad blockers. It's just most major multinationals have matured or diversified to a point where they are functional monopolies, and no longer gain any value in competition or service improvement.

At this stage of the merger and consolidation phase of global capitalism, with captured governments that won't dare break them up or fine them more than a meek virtue signal, the most cost effective way to satiate the infinite growth of capitalism is to increase the exploitation and value extraction of their existing user base as much as possible (aka enshittification).

[–] NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 17 points 11 months ago

their SEC paperwork states that adblockers are a risk to their profits.

Concluding implicitly: "... and therefore a threat to all your computers' security" :-)

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago

It’s more obvious than that even; their SEC paperwork states that adblockers are a risk to their profits.

Sounds like the single best reason to use one.

[–] dalekcaan@lemm.ee 5 points 11 months ago

Dear God, won't anyone think of the shareholders?

[–] ButtDrugs@lemm.ee 32 points 11 months ago

Just for clarity, they already switched protocols (Manifest v3), they just have continued to support the old format (v2) that allows unlock origin to work. They are discontinuing support for v2 next year.

[–] flappy@lemm.ee 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

What really pisses me off is that mv3 is becoming a standard that Vivaldi, Firefox, Opera, Edge, etc. will use.

[–] Matth78@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago

Mind you that Firefox will adjust it to be able to fully support ad blocker.