• BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      11 months ago

      You can at least pay (quite a lot less than a cable subscription) to remove them. It beats paying $80 a month for the great privilege of spending 30% of the time watching ads.

      For now, of course.

          • thoughts3rased@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            21
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            I think the day an adblocker starts charging people is the day that companies will try to sue them into non-existence with lawsuits they know will fail.

            Either that or nobody will pay for it because they’re used to getting adblockers for free. They’ll just move to another one or maybe one that’s FOSS.

            • Patch@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              11 months ago

              They’ll just move to another one or maybe one that’s FOSS.

              All the major ones are already open source. uBlock Origin, uBlock, AdBlock, AdBlock Plus and AdGuard are all licensed under GPLv3. If anyone fancied starting another competing one for some reason they’d have plenty of codebases to choose from.

      • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        35
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Soon you’ll pay AND watch ads. Maybe there will be a free tier with 5 minute ad breaks, and paid tier with 1 minute ad breaks.

      • Patch@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        You can at least pay (quite a lot less than a cable subscription)

        Well I should bloody well hope so, considering you also get far less than cable.

        YouTube is still mostly amateur or indie content, most of it short-form, and most of it frankly just not very good. There’s still stuff on there worth watching, and I know some people really do consume a lot of content on there in the manner of watching TV back in the day, but objectively it really isn’t the same thing as professional studio content. I can watch some random guy in Ohio do a 15 minute review of some niche thing I’m interested in as much as anyone can, but there’s no way I’d consider that worth the same value as a long form TV series or feature film.

        • Evotech@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Less? I’d argue YouTube gets you way more than cable

          There’s a buttload of high quality content

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

        Tbh paying a package deal isn’t actually the worst thing. I get netflix, sky sports, BT sports, movies, all channels, 1gb broadband and 1 unlimited data SIM. £100 pm.

        Yes it’s expensive but it’s £55 for 1gb broadband anyway. They have a stranglehold over football/soccer that it’s hard to get away from. Yes you can pirate the stream but it’s not the same.

        This has fuck all to do with YT but generally getting packages individually isn’t cheaper sometimes.

    • atomWood@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      I certainly prefer fewer and longer ad breaks, over several short ones, but this still sucks.

    • kratoz29@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      No, full circle would be more and longer ads.

      Anyway, I’m a Smart Tube User :)