It's also worth mentioning that Youtube Premium will only help Google build better profiles of its subscribers. Subscribers will be required to surrender their contact information and be forced to log in before watching videos.
So how do you suggest we fund content creators? Or should they all just start working for free to entertain you without exposing you to those horrible dangerous ads?
when looking at these thing you gotta ask yourself what would happen if everybody does it ? would the company be satisfied and say yes we got enough money, or would they just try to squeeze more juice out of you because where else would you go ?
So you can already do exactly what you want with just the single subscription. I'm sure you're delighted to hear this, and won't react by moving the goalposts.
Music videos, DJ mixes, live music streams, 10 hours of _____, classical for studying, etc. all pop up in Music.
It's actually kind of nice if you spend any time on things like lofi girl, DJ mixes, "___ Hours of ___ for ___", since Music's interface is more lightweight and those videos can be added to otherwise audio-only playlists.
on a serious note, i can't reproduce with firefox maybe it's not rolled out yet
I wonder how much money they're spending in trying to fight this rat race. It's not just engineering hours but also people switching from chrome to Firefox, and the bad press associated with it.
I never thought adblocker usage was so prevalent, but this is just personal experience. No one I knew personally, normal people I mean, used adblocked. I remember I had a class in university where they encouraged people to install adblock, only a handful of us already had it installed. There were some pretty interesting ethical arguments for using adblock, sad that I can barely remember any!
"Ad blockers are an important way of safeguarding users online, since they effectively protect against malware attacks carried out by externally embedded advertising."
https://www.bsi.bund.de/EN/Themen/Verbraucherinnen-und-Verbr...
Besides Google does other things to slow YouTube down on Firefox so this isn’t really a compelling reason to switch browsers for most people. They’ll likely just disable their ad blocker. For the person who values privacy that much, they’re likely staying off Google properties anyway, and for the average user, their YouTube experience is more important.
Ads do finance some infrastructure, especially platforms like youtube and large commercial social media sites. But that is not all infrastructure at all and I believe there is a strong ethical case that you should protect people from unwanted advertising in any case.
That was... not a bad thing?
It seems like there's a sometimes-auto-downgrading where any video above 360 p gets throttled and causes buffering. I've recently been trying out a Chrome extension called Clear Skies which has been working well. It's not an adblocker but it does hide and skip ads and avoids the performance hit that I was seeing previously when viewing youtube with Firefox.
Source: my own experience. I never use Youtube directly. I use Peertube to distribute whatever video content I publish - not much but there is some - and use a proxy of some sorts whenever I have to get something from Youtube. When the proxy stops working - which happens every now and then since they are essentially web scrapers - I search elsewhere using my own SearxNG instance. If I do not find the video elsewhere I usually just wait for the proxy to start working again. Only in exceptional circumstances will I go to the Youtube site directly and in those cases only in a 'private' browser window/tab. I do not remember the last time I had to do this so it is not a regular occurrence but what I do remember for the few times I visited that site is just how slow and bloated it is compared to my normal way of using it.
[1]: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/02/time-make-amends-googl...
