It looks like Google are pushing pretty hard on AdBlockers now. Looks like a pretty aggressive new UI from them.

I’m finding revanced for Android is still working well, but I’ve got no idea when that’ll become less reliable

adblock

  • ParkingPsychology
    link
    fedilink
    561 year ago

    There’s an unwritten deal, you know. Youtube lets us block and in return, we allow Youtube to know we block. Because if we take that away from Youtube, Youtube no longer has reliable viewer statistics and the price of their ads will go down.

    Now it seems Youtube wants to break the deal (and they can, unless we start pirating Youtube content, they can at the very least make us sit through a minute of black screen before each video). They probably think the damage that will be done is less than the additional income that the subscriptions generate.

    it’s just the same old story. Grow, grow, grow, wait until you’ve got a monopoly, now squeeeeeeeeze the profit.

    Twitter, Reddit, now Youtube. Welcome to the age of enshittification.

    • Granite
      link
      fedilink
      161 year ago

      And this is why Google removed Ad Nauseam from being a legit chrome extension, because it blocks ads and also silently clicks on every one, ruining Goole’s data.

      That being said, idk how safe it is if it does click on every ad. It probably is, but I’d have to do more research.

      • Copperhead
        link
        fedilink
        101 year ago

        I had no clue of the existence of the Ad Nauseam browser extension. I use Firefox and I just added it to my browser.

        I read that it’s built off of uBlock Origin, which I already trust because of the open source nature of it, so that was a huge plus for me.

        It may not necessarily have been your intention to inform people of Ad Nauseam, but I definitely thank you for bringing it up in the first place!

          • Helldiver_M
            link
            fedilink
            5
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            It does yes. It also interferes with other privacy related extensions like privacy badger. I have disabled both Ublock Orgin and Privacy Badger in favor of AdNauseam and have been pleased. After using it for about a week, it says I’ve “clicked” on about $150 worth of ads.

            The main thing to note is if you’re on a site, and you see ads, you can always flip AdNauseam into “strict” mode. In strict mode, it is less effective at clicking on ads, but better at making sure nothing pops up. There’s only one site that I’ve had to use strict mode on so far. Attached image is of my “ad vault” (the ads that have been clicked). I did hide the NSFW ads:

            • JickleMithers
              link
              fedilink
              41 year ago

              One thing that worries me about this approach is that it’s still generating ad revenue. Sure you don’t actually see the ads but it’s still an incentive for companies to continue running more and more ads.

              • Helldiver_M
                link
                fedilink
                3
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                From the persepctive of the host site, maybe. But for the advertisers, AdNauseam punishes them pretty badly. The idea is to destroy the relationship between the “click through rate” and “conversion rate” of offending sites/ads.

                The linked article discusses the phenomena in more detail, but the bottom line is that advertisers want sales. If their ads don’t get sales on a certain platform, they will no longer advertise on said platform.

                I’ve also attached a screenshot of the relevant part of the article.
                https://www.wordstream.com/average-ctr

                That’s without even considering how this screws up the data that organizations like Google are trying to track. That data is worth something to them, and this obfuscates it.

                • JickleMithers
                  link
                  fedilink
                  21 year ago

                  he idea is to destroy the relationship between the “click through rate” and “conversion rate” of offending sites/ads.

                  Ah, I didn’t think of this part. I was going of off click through rate but didn’t think about it destroying the conversion rate

              • Granite
                link
                fedilink
                21 year ago

                But they’re not making the company paying for the ads any profit. It’s a money sink for them. But you’re correct in that whoever is hosting the ads will make their coin.

      • Helldiver_M
        link
        fedilink
        3
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Just to clarify, AdNauseam doesn’t click on every ad. Certainly not by default. I’ve noticed that while it does hide ads embedded in YouTube videos, it doesn’t seem to click them often. (Though, it does still click on image based ads on YouTube).

        Additionally, by default AdNauseam does not click on ads that are “do not track” (DNT) compliant, an emerging standard set by the Electronic Frontier Foundation. I’ll link to the GitHub FAQ post the devs made regarding why they, by default, don’t click DNT compliant ads.

        https://github.com/dhowe/AdNauseam/wiki/FAQ#how-and-why-does-adnauseam-make-exceptions-for-non-tracking-ads

    • weyland-yutani
      link
      fedilink
      71 year ago

      Twitter, Reddit, now Youtube. Welcome to the age of enshittification.

      That’s how end of Web 2.0 looks like. It really lived a long life, maybe even too long.