I often see the sentiment that YouTube and adblockers will be forever locked in a cat-and-mouse game. However, for many years now, Twitch has entirely eliminated adblocking on desktop web.

What is stopping YouTube from replicating Twitch’s advertising strategy of embedding ads directly into their videos?

  • yukichigai@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    110
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    As others have said, Twitch adblocking still works just fine. There are multiple plugins which block their ads, and you can even paste in a few custom filters to uBlock Origin and bypass them.

    In other words, it’s not inevitable.

    Think of it this way: YouTube has to pay people to work on anti-adblocking tech, whereas pissed off nerds with a permanent “fuck you I do what I want” energy will figure out how to defeat those measures for free.

    • atlasraven31@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      102
      ·
      11 months ago

      Sometimes, those same engineers that put the anti-adblocking in 9-5 come home and share how to disable it.

    • Evotech@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      But you have to wait for the ads to stop playing right? The ads literally replace them video stream

      • yukichigai@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        Nope! Worst case the stream quality gets a little lower (some plugins pull from the overlay video that appears at the bottom right) but you don’t miss out on the stream at all.

  • Kalash@feddit.ch
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    92
    ·
    11 months ago

    However, for many years now, Twitch has entirely eliminated adblocking on desktop web.

    No they haven’t.

  • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    81
    ·
    11 months ago

    However, for many years now, Twitch has entirely eliminated adblocking on desktop web

    Me, having not seen an ad on Twitch in ~forever: 🤷‍♀️

      • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        11 months ago

        You could say they’ve won battles, but never any war against piracy.

        They’ve made examples out of low-hanging fruit and are trying to legislate compete authority over copyright(they’d legislate parody if they could), but it just isn’t feasible.

        Piracy is a decentralized, evolving amalgation of countless methods and technologies bent toward the relatively simple task of sharing media.

        They can close down a website or fine a clueless teenager 200,000, But that has no effect on the desire to watch a movie or play a video game without betting your money that the production will be of value.

  • cry@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    69
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Twitch has entirely eliminated adblocking on desktop web

    Nope, ive not watched an ad on twitch for years.

  • linearchaos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    The most significant thing they can do is to force login to watch content, DRM all video, stream the commercials in line as an indistinguishable (to the client) part of the video feed, and stagger the start and stop of each video block randomized to the individual user.

    If the client gets absolutely no identification that the stream has changed, and they do a good job with the DRM, It will make it very hard for an individual user to block or skip commercials. People will still be able to screen record entire shows and use commercial skipping technology on it. It might even end up where popular channels end up getting distributed as pirated material through torrent

    Realistically though, this is a losing move on their side. The people that are using ads skipping arent about to buy premium, and many if not most are not going to watch ads. They’ll lose what tracking data they get from those people and they’ll lose those people’s engagement boosts and shares. They’ll also introduce a lot of non-paying ad viewers into the pool, making their ads worth even less.

    • spider@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      They’ll lose what tracking data they get from those people and they’ll lose those people’s engagement boosts and shares.

      enspezzification

    • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      If the ads are unavailable to be skipped through with the progress bar normally, then the computer playing the video necessarily has to be told where they are in some way even if indirectly, because it can skip parts of the regular video but not parts of the ads, so an adblocker client could buffer the video a bit and then play it with those parts removed. Unless they got rid of the ability to skip or fast forward parts of video entirely, or let you do that to ads (in which case you’d probably just manually skip so seems unlikely), but even in that case, if ads are in different parts of the video for different users, then some program could periodically take compressed screenshots or other identifying information about a frame and send them to some shared database, and compare what parts each user has in common, so that a program could cut out sections of the video that don’t fit.

      For that matter, something that I’ve wondered about of late with all this AI development is if an AI could be trained to distinguish ads from non-ad content, and used to power some kind of adblocker to cut ads out when they’re integrated seamlessly into a video or stream.

      • linearchaos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        I think they could sidestep that.

        If server detects request to move forward past a commercial on the stream, it moves the commercial forward a small random time skip ahead. After a few of those it just disables your accounts ability to ff for a timeout.

        I suspect it wouldn’t be all that hard to redesign the system from the ground up to force us into screen recording.

        As far as AI detect, probably viable. A lot harder with user generated content. Audio levels change, color grading and composition change. The commercials are of a fairly known length at the moment which would make it easier. They can throw it off by making commercials several seconds or even tens of seconds longer. False positives would definitely be a difficult point on game reviewers and reaction youtubers.

    • hushable@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      People will still be able to screen record entire shows and use commercial skipping technology on it. It might even end up where popular channels end up getting distributed as pirated material through torrent

      This already happened with YouTube Red exclusive shows and it will happen again

    • ExLisper@linux.community
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yes but at some point they will display the video encoded on the screen and you will need Nueralink style chip embedded in your brain to decode it. It will be impossible to record the content, strip the adds and share it outside the platform. Or maybe we will figure out how to decode the video by just monitoring the brain activity?

  • AphoticDev@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    What’re you talking about? I use a Firefox plugin that blocks ads on Twitch. I haven’t seen one since I started using it.

  • NutWrench@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    11 months ago

    Youtube (like Reddit) has forgotten that they only exist in the first place because of the uploads of their users. They produce no content themselves. They need us a LOT more than we need them.

    • 0485@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      11 months ago

      Never forget the YouTube rewind video they produced themselves which beacme the most disliked video ever! Lol

    • Shard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      The issue with YouTube is that while they don’t produce their own content, they’re currently hosting a wealth of information and there is no competitor at this moment who can come close to consolidating all that archival information.

      I don’t mean react videos or mrbeast. If those ever disappeared from the face, nothing of value would have been lost.

      I mean science, history and engineering channels. Tutorials and full blown college or university lectures. Documentaries. Archival videos and audio recordings. There is a great wealth of information currently hosted on YouTube and they’re holding it hostage.

      Those will have to find a new home and it will likely be spread out over different hosting services so we will lose the convenience of having all this great information under one roof. Look at how dispersed lemmy is at the moment. I have no doubt that Lemmy will eventually match reddit, but lets be honest. We lose a great centralized location for information, tech support and memes.

      • rifugee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        11 months ago

        I don’t think the centralization of information is necessarily a good thing. Besides, having information on different sites is why search engines exist. When I need to learn how to replace, let’s say a toilet shut off valve, I start with a search engine, so it doesn’t matter to me if I find a video on YouTube, Vimeo, or some other service, as long as I don’t have to sign up to view it.

        The convenience that YouTube offers is a centralized place for entertainment, like Netflix used to be, and like we’ve had to do with streaming, we’ll adapt if we must.

        YouTube was an amazing idea that changed the world, but now it’s being squeezed for every penny that Google can get, a company that found “Don’t be evil” too restrictive. It’s just another example of what happens when a company has to be more profitable every year in order to be considered successful.

        • Shard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Don’t get me wrong. I never said it was a good thing.

          But unfortunately its what we have now. Same thing with Wikipedia. If they one day decided they wanted to squeeze a few pennies out of Wikipedia or just close shop overnight, we’d all be shit outta luck because its the only massive scale encyclopedia around. Nothing else comes close.

          We should absolutely seek to decentralize that repository of videos yet somehow maintain the ease of having a collective index we can easily scour through to find the information we need.

          • rifugee@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            I apologize if I put words in your mouth.

            Fortunately, it’s actually pretty easy to download a copy of Wikipedia and it’s not even that big. For YT, it would be a pretty massive undertaking. I suppose a good way to start would be to download all the content from channels that you found interesting; I’m pretty sure there are tools that facilitate that. Then, ignoring licensing and copyright issues, hosting the content would depend on how big the data is. Maybe something like Plex or Jellyfin? I kinda want to try it now with a smaller channel just to see.

    • FierroGamer@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      And they’re not losing us any time soon, for years I’ve seen people saying that YouTube is going down because they do shit the users don’t like and yet everyone keeps using them and in general making no effort in changing that.

      It’s just like Reddit, a few of us left but that didn’t change anything, everyone’s still using it and they’re not stopping any time soon.

      Even if not abandoning the platform, it would only take a decent portion of the users reducing their use of the platform for them to feel a punishment of some sort, but nobody’s really willing to do anything other than complain and automatically dismiss any suggestion of an alternative.

        • FierroGamer@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Nah, because no alternative can be a complete replacement and if it’s not the exact same experience, people aren’t willing to put that tiniest bit of effort.

          Again, look at Reddit as an example, alternatives exist, yet none of them are the exact same because there’s not a comparable size, and because of that people will just pull down their pants and begrudgingly accept reddit’s problems.

    • phillaholic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      You realize as revenue and premium subs are the only reason they host video right? They’d rather you quit using their bandwidth. You literally cost them money.

      • ilickfrogs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        This right here. If you block ads you’re literally worth less than nothing to them and they couldn’t care less where you go. You’re just a bandwidth leech. I use uBlock, but have some self awareness.

      • ilobmirt@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Good. Considering that they roll in billions, I have no sympathy for them.

        I will not shed a tear at the death of the advertisement based internet. Or the horrible things that it has motivated companies to do to maximize advertisement revenue.

  • DrQuint@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    11 months ago

    Twitch has what now? That’s the first (and will be last) time I hear that

    • Are_Euclidding_Me [e/em/eir]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yup! It’s what finally made me stop watching twitch (embarrassing, I know, I’m more of a gamer than I like to admit). Minutes of unskippable ads, way too often, and no adblocker could get rid of them. The best I could find was a twitch redirect that would block the ad, but it couldn’t give you the content back, so when the ads happened the stream would just go dark until they were over. I decided enough was enough and I haven’t gone on twitch since. I’m mentally preparing to do the same with youtube if and when they succeed in breaking adblockers. Which is going to absolutely suck, I watch a lot of youtube, but maybe it’ll actually be a good thing and I’ll be on the internet less.

  • space@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    I think video platforms should be hosted by the government, like public libraries. They are very difficult to run at a profitable rate, and YouTube is basically a monopoly in this space. But it has an incredible value to society.

    • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      The problem is that we have tried this, there was a period of time when during the Great depression, in order to keep the Arts alive, the Government tried hosting stages for performers to enact plays on.

      This did not work because the government kept trying to encourage that the plays promote a piece of propaganda that made the US look good or would punish plays that were accused of showing anti-American sentiment.

      Imagine if government did Run YouTube, what would happen the second a Donald Trump got in office?

      Suddenly only the alt right are allowed to make videos.

      What we need is something like fediverse, but for online videos. Something where the host is an entirely neutral party that does not moderate the videos unless required to in order to comply with law enforcement or in instances where action against the video is obvious, such as a call to arms or if someone starts hosting Kiddie porn

      • Bongles@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        11 months ago

        What we need is something like fediverse, but for online videos

        That’s Peertube right? I haven’t used it.

        • Bizzle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          11 months ago

          That’s pretty much the problem with every federated service right now 😬

          • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Even if it was used it’s unlikely Peertube could compete with YouTube due to the nature of storage space required for HD videos.

    • Hedup@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      11 months ago

      To that they will immediately answer - but do you want all your youtube habits to be in the hands of the government?

        • Jako301@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          The company anonymises your data and sells it to get the most value out of it.

          The state on the other hand will eventually use it to spy on you and controll you if necessary.

          • trafficnab@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            I feel like a lot of people don’t realize this, keeping your data a secret is these ad platform’s top priority, knowing what you like (for highly targeted ads) while others don’t is one of the biggest ways they make money

      • Emi621@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        Yes if it’s good government. Of course there’s problem of getting good government that won’t abuse anything.

  • Frozzie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    The European Union is about to ban anti-adblockers since they run scripts on your computer without your consent, thus violating GDPR.

      • Tosti@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        You don’t need permission for essentials. If your side requires a JavaScript to open a window it is fine, same as css, login scripts,etc etc. Even some cookies are fine.

        But there already have been rulings by EU courts in the that a script to detect adblockers is not essential. Also GDPR and the cookie regs forbid negative consequences for refusal.

    • Jako301@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      There will just be another popup and everything is fine. Ads are youtube business model, they can ask you to deactivate adblock, pay up or leave the site like a lot of news sites do. Running anti-adblockers is entirely within the law if you get informed about it on the site.

  • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Nope.

    Piracy/adtech evasion is actually a very similar paradigm to infosec/security: you have to succeed all the time, always; the attackers/exploiters only have to succeed once, and there’s a lot more attackers than your company has employees, let alone security specialists.

    • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      11 months ago

      Indeed, it’s why Nintendo will never win the war against piracy, the Pirates only have to break the code once. I’m sure Nintendo could update it to make it harder to crack, but it will never be impossible to crack. And it’s not like they are going to support the Nintendo switch forever. Eventually everybody is getting there rare shiny event Pokemon and their smash mods to make Waluigi and whoever the main character of the week is playable

    • Evotech@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      11 months ago

      What? They have to succeed every time also.

      Nobody uses an adbloxker which blocks 1 ad

      • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        11 months ago

        You’re not getting what I’m saying.

        The definition of total success for people who are on the defensive side is to to block every possible exploit, always, without exception.

        The definition of total success for people who are on the attacking side is to find one way around whatever the defense side has put in place once, and then they can get what they want.

        • Evotech@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          11 months ago

          I still think it’s not a comparable situation. Since winning once in afbloxking does not give you a permanent gain or anything like gaining access to a system would.

          • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            … What?

            Youtube has to detect every type of adblocker.

            Ublock origin only needs to find 1 way around their detection.

            And even if ublock ever gets stumped, a thousand people are trying to find their own version of 1 way around detection.

            Youtube is playing whack a mole against a thousand moles, and just one unbopped mole destroys their hammer and they need to go craft a new one from scratch.

            The moles win every time.

            • Evotech@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              I agree it’s a game of whack a mole

              But it’s not directly comparable to infosec. In adblocking is a game of whack a mole on both sides. And even if you get around the adblocking today, there’s no guarantee you’ll do it tomorrow.

  • Knusper@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    A big difference is that Twitch livestreams are creating content as reality happens. You can’t skip ahead, you can’t pre-load into a buffer. YouTube would need to take those features away to allow for similarly effective ad enforcement, which would eliminate a significant advantage of VODs.

    • Jimmycrackcrack@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’ve never used twitch. You can’t preload? Like, you can’t just pause while someone does their paid spot and then skip past it?

      • Knusper@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        11 months ago

        That one can be realized client-side (just don’t actually pause the stream download, but rather write it into a buffer). No idea, if there actually is a client that implements this, but it is conceptually possible.

        I rather meant that with a livestream, people don’t want to be several minutes behind. They want at most a few seconds delay, so they can collectively chat about the things happening in the stream and reasonably hold conversations with the streamer.

        What you can do as well, is to just pause the stream when the ad starts and then reload when you imagine the ad might be over…

  • jet@hackertalks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    YouTube can always win the war, at any time, they can turn off their servers

    Everything else is just an arms race until YouTube decides it’s not worth participating anymore.

    The war isnt about viewing YouTube, the war is YouTube as an exclusive video platform globally. As long as there’s no serious federated competitors to YouTube, we’re stuck with them, and we’re losing the war.

    • DrQuint@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      11 months ago

      Napoleon can always win the war, he can just stop invading and then shoot himself

      Weird definition of victory

      • jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        YouTube doesn’t have to participate, so they can win in the sense that they don’t have to give anybody content if they don’t see a benefit. The world can’t compell YouTube to participate if they don’t want to.

        • Adalast@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          By the same token a content creator strike would really hurt if it were large enough.

          • tofubl@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            What a world it would be were that a possibility.

            Sadly, I neither see a content creators’ union on the horizon anytime soon, nor do I see individual creators die a martyr’s death, financially speaking…

    • MigratingtoLemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yeah, inside a week of them closing their servers I’ll see an absolute flood of users on platforms supporting LBRY (Peertube, anyone?) and that’ll be it. The day LTT and MKBHD go and say “Alright, we’ve had enough, they removed all of our content. We’re self-hosting it now” and do it, YouTube is dead beyond any semblance of hope.

      So no, I’m not very worried.