YouTube has been spotted testing server-side ads, which could pose a problem to ad blockers.

  • polonius-rex@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    165
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago
    www.youtube.com##+js(json-prune-fetch-response, playerAds adPlacements adSlots playerResponse.playerAds playerResponse.adPlacements playerResponse.adSlots, , propsToMatch, /player?)
    

    Click on uBO icon > ⚙ Dashboard button > Add the filter(s) in “My filters” pane > ✓ Apply changes > Open new tab and test again.

    from the reddit page idk if it works but most comments say it does

    and if it does, that’s fucking hilarious

    this will have taken a team months of work and one ublock dev just threw it in the toilet within an hour

    • downpunxx@fedia.ioOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      56
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      ok, so i added this code to my ublock origin filter list, then went to youtube, and the injected ads were still showing up in about half the vids. closed firefox, reopened, same. rebooted my win11 machine, now the injected ads are NOT showing up any longer. not sure if youtube switched it off because they’re still beta testing this bullshit or if the code is working but it SEEMS to be working. if it stops i’ll come back to edit this comment. thanks for the tip man!

      • viking@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        NewPipe works, so I’m sure reVanced can/could do it as well. SmartTube (Android TV exclusive) also implemented it weeks ago, I never have seen a single ad.

  • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    84
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    New article title. YouTube tests more ways of making their service shit and driving away users.

    Edit: TIFO Scott Manley is on Odysee so i will start watching him there instead. One less yt channel is always a good thing

    • Wogi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      2 months ago

      I mean, if you’re not paying for it, and they can’t advertise to you, what do they need you for?

      • FiveMacs@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        38
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        To keep claiming they have x billion accounts…

        There’s a big reason why these companies don’t remove the bots and willingly allow them to do whatever. It boosts their numbers to inflate their actual worth.

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

        at least on my part, what they get from channel memberships (a whopping 30%) I’m sure exceeds the amount in ad revenue they lose from me

      • tabular@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Does YouTube have competition? Your line of inquiry doesn’t mean much if the content is only on YouTube.

        • Wogi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          I’m not sure what point you think you’re making.

          YouTube doesn’t want you visiting if they can’t either put ads in front of you or get you to subscribe to premium. I appreciate wanting to access YouTube without ads, but from where they’re sitting, if they scare you off with server side ads all the better.

          • tabular@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Simply put: why care about their point of view? Google does not have your best interests in mind, often the opposite. There’s no where else to get almost all of the content, why do without or waste time with ads in this short life.

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

              YouTube could fall off the face of the earth and I would probably see my quality of life improve slightly.

              I don’t give a shit about Google. Perspective here is important when you threaten to leave the platform all together, as if they would care. If you’re one of the users they gain no ad revenue or subscription revenue from, they’re probably happy to see you go.

              Could they be doing more to try to turn Adblock users in to paid subscribers? Sure. I’m not here to defend their methods. I’m just saying that if you’re not paying, and you can’t be served ads, they really don’t care if you continue to use the service or not.

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

        I did pay for it but they massively increased the price while the recommendation algorithm was deliberately made worse and they wouldn’t stop pushing short format videos.

      • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        Youtube is google No 1 source of machine learning content. Fuckloads of video, audio and subtitle data they can use to feed and train their systems. Youtube itself doesnt need to make profit, thats just a bonus for them.

        • Wogi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          2 months ago

          YouTube advertising is more than 10% of Google services total profits.

          That’s not a bonus, that’s a dependant revenue stream.

    • IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      YouTube: oh no, the freeloaders costing us money are going away, what will we ever do!?

  • blady_blah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    69
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I would rather pay an ad-block company a monthly subscription than give it to YouTube in blackmail. This will just be another salvo in a never ending war.

    • glitchdx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      I used to pay for youtube premium. My logic being that I was using an adblocker anyway, and I wanted the content creators I watched to get some kind of revenue for my watchtime. Youtube stopped taking my money a while back, and I can’t be bothered to figure out why. These days, there’s so little content that I find interesting that I spend more time scrolling than I do actually watching videos. It’s only a matter of time until I just stop regularly going to youtube.

        • dan@upvote.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I paid for it before they removed Google Play Music. I was on one of the plans that was $8 for both Google Play Music and YouTube Red.

  • elbucho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    2 months ago

    I find it fascinating how media companies evolved their usage of ads over time. Used to be that the purpose of showing someone an ad was to get them to buy your product. Now, though, the companies who make the ads are paying to have them put on media networks who use the ads to annoy you into paying for a premium membership so you don’t have to see them. It’s double dipping.

    Not sure how I would feel if I made an ad, and YouTube was saying to their users: “Yeah, you like that fucking ad? Super annoying, isn’t it? If you don’t pay me more money, I’m going to cram that annoying bullshit down your throat every time you want to watch a video. I’m going to put ads at the beginning of videos. I’m going to sprinkle them throughout the middle. Hell, I’m even going to make you watch ads after the video ends! You like that, you little bitch??”

  • downpunxx@fedia.ioOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Just got hit with this for the first time, and at first I was like what the fuck is this happening here, I’m running Firefox latest, and UBlock origin latest, never seen this before. Happening for every video, two injected video ads before the video, seem skippable, but i’m not clicking on them. Hope UBlock catches up to this quick, this sucks.

    • ShunkW@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      2 months ago

      Mine are getting trapped by pihole. They take 10 seconds to time out and just show a banner ad that won’t automatically go away without hitting the skip button. It’s really frustrating since I liked letting videos auto play as I fall asleep.

      • downpunxx@fedia.ioOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        at least it’s not currently spawning an actual video advertisement, so, small blessings, the two injected ads stay static for 10 seconds a piece (makes sense), and if you don’t click skip, the first tiers to the second then tiers to the video (was thinking of going pihole but you just confirmed it won’t make a difference, if they start injecting autoplay video ads, then it’ll be back on my todo list)

    • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      2 months ago

      Support candidates who want to limit the ability for large tech companies to acquire their competitors. Maybe even those that wish to see their acquisitions rolled back. Maybe even those that wish to see them broken up.

    • QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      Grayjay has been useful for that. I still follow people on YouTube, but if they setup a channel anywhere else I can switch my feed to draw from those sources instead.

    • magic_lobster_party@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’m not sure if a sponsorblock like solution will work. Sponsorblock is entirely reliant on timestamps provided by users.

      A similar solution for YouTube’s ads will only work if the ads always happen at the same timestamps and have the same length. This is not necessarily the case, as ads can happen at any point.

      • InternetUser2012@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        2 months ago

        There’s already a filter for UBO that blocks it. That was much quicker than I expected. Works and is further down this thread.

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

        I remember using MythTV in the beforetimes, and you’d record the show off the cable tuner, then it would process the file and remove the commercials based on volume levels and light signatures. It was remarkably good at it and was how I watched all TV until streaming came around.

        I would imagine someone could do the same even better today with an AI model that would recognize all the ads and deliver an edited stream. The problem is that the video would have to be downloaded beforehand and then the streams stored elsewhere and referenced by an addon that redirects you.

        • dan@upvote.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          then it would process the file and remove the commercials

          This still exists today, for example in Plex’s DVR. Practically everything that blocks commercials these days uses comskip or a fork of it.

      • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        There will have to be designated points where midroll ads can happen, just like the current system has, so the ads aren’t inserted mid-sentence or destroy an important sequence in the video. Nobody would accept it otherwise.

        It’s a matter of detecting those points, mapping them to specific frames in the video, them automatically detecting when an ad is inserted on that basis.

        It’s slightly harder to do, but not impossible.

        • Unbecredible@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Unfortunately I think there’s been a good bit of evidence recently that people WILL accept it. As a prime example lemmy hasn’t exactly replaced reddit despite the relative uproar that the API changes caused. Netflix & co just keep hiking prices and people just keep buying it.

          And then on the technical side, if the ads are coming from the server it’s possible youtube might just refuse to serve the rest of the video stream until all or most the ad’s runtime has passed. It depends on how serious they want to get about capturing the revenue lost to adblock users.

          • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Sure, but then that’s an even worse enshittification if they do make it random.

            The mandatory wait-time will stop people from seeking through videos organically. Yet another thing that makes it worse for everyone.

            And even then, it should still be possible to detect which frames are part of the original video and which are not, either by detecting original video frames, or building a database of ads and detecting them within videos.

            The fact that lots of people still use reddit is just due to inertia. Platforms don’t die immediately overnight. Digg still exists. It still calls itself “The homepage of the internet.” The process of transitioning to a federated internet is going to take many years.

            Reddit is still dying however. There’s been a marked drop in the quality of posts over there, and they’re harder to access, now they’re doing an exclusivity thing with google which is also enshittifying massively. That is making it less and less appealling over time. It won’t last forever as a culturally relevant site.

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        if you’re downloading the video locally it would be incredibly trivial to remove the segment of the ad. There are various different mechanisms i can think of that would work.

        obviously, beginning and end ads are super trivial.

        Ideally, youtube won’t be natively encoding the ads into the videos, because that would be a nightmare, so presumably they’re doing injection instead, that would be pretty obvious from the get go.

        If not, they have to have some kind of interface for the advertisement you could very easily use that to track the ad placement itself, though that might be problematic.

        There are likely other clever things that can be done, we’ll have to see what happens.

  • RonnyZittledong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    This must consume a tremendous amount of processing to do since they would have to transcode copies for every ad region/campaign and every resolution on demand. I am interested in how they made this financially viable.

    • Nollij@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 months ago

      Not necessarily. They could split the video in advance, assuming the ads will always be at the same point. Even if not, they could still use the direct, unaltered source with a range. The big challenge would be keeping it all synced, which I think is safe to say that they will get right.

      But even if it did need to be transcoded, YouTube automatically transcodes every single video uploaded, multiple times. They are clearly not afraid of it.

      • EleventhHour@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        If you’ve ever used yt-dl, you’ll know that YT vids are all split into multiple files. Presumably, this is where the ads get injected.

        • SaltySalamander@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          No, they’re not split. Each one of those results you get from yt-dlp is a different version of the same video. I.e. different resolutions, different codecs. Some of them are the audio, some of them are the video, but they’re not split.

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

            They are also that. But when you watch YouTube-dl download a video, it downloads several parts, then ffmpeg recombines them into a single output file.

    • roofuskit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 months ago

      Since AI has caused them to complete abandoned any illusions about their carbon zero footprint I think they just stopped caring.

    • magic_lobster_party@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      They don’t need to do any extra transcoding. It’s not that costly to stitch videos together. If done at specific strategic locations, it’s like copying a text file into another.

  • dinckel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I know there’s a significant part of the market that’d just say yeah, fuck it, i’ll pay for Redtube Youtube Red Youtube Premium, but there’s also a significant part of it, where a lot of people would rather just stop watching stuff entirely.

    It’s just like Hulu back in the days. You’d have no choice but to pay for a premium tier, just to have 14 unskippable ads forced down your throat, all in a span of a 19 minute long tv episode. I stopped paying after that month and resorted to piracy.

    Piracy is always a service issue, except now it’s legitimately going to harm individual creators, who have just about everything to lose, rathen that a rotten husk of some corporation, that’s going to print free money, no matter what you do

    • TimeSquirrel@kbin.melroy.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      except now it’s legitimately going to harm individual creators,

      I know it isn’t the world we live in anymore, and there’s nothing we can do about it…but maybe we shouldn’t have treated YouTube like a job and just kept it as a hobby video website between ordinary people. Like what it started out as.

      • dinckel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        2 months ago

        To be honest, whether we want it or not, art is a necessary aspect of society. The issue here is that we put a lot of trust in a corporate environment, the entire goal of which is to pocket as much as possible, while riding the success of the people creating stuff

        • TimeSquirrel@kbin.melroy.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Yeah that’s what I mean. People created entire careers which are 100% dependent on the whims of a mega corporation. It never seemed like a stable source of income to me. I’ve always treated it like it’s just a silly video site, nothing more.

  • ramble81@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is where AI would come in handy. Start scrubbing the buffer as it’s coming in to identify the difference and jump past it.

    • cRazi_man@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      2 months ago

      It becomes an AI war. They will use AI to make ads to get around the AI blocking. The ads will end up looking very similar to the content.

      Ad: “Hey guys. It’s ya boy, NordVPN, here today to tell you about the dangers of using the internet without my VPN…”

      • Kowowow@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Then you start using ai to put in anti ads that point out all the bad stuff about the usual ad subjects, I’d say get as code to libel/slander as possible without risking a lawsuit

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

        I’d be watching a car accident compilation and a Buick starts trying to tell me to ask my doctor about Cymbalta. You know… I might actually watch that.

    • Azzu@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Aren’t they legally required to indicate that an ad is playing? Should be almost trivial to detect and I don’t know how they’d get around that.

  • UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    2 months ago

    Let’s go full guerilla: Plugin that lets you select the first and the last frame of an ad, thus allows to report the beginning and length to a synced database. When that frame is found in the buffer, skip X frames ahead.

    For ergonomics, the plugin should be able to spot cuts in the video so you can easily select the correct frames.

    For resilience, maybe settle for similar frames. Thinking about anti-abuse, maybe require a minimum number of reports relative to the views (and ofc allow to not skip stuff).

    • deadcade@lemmy.deadca.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      Due to legal reasons, and to keep advertisers happy, YouTube is forced to display the “Advertisement” mark and a link to the advertisers website. With these, all the required information exists to allow an adblocker to skip any ads embedded in the video stream. No community flagging of ads is required.

      • dan@upvote.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        YouTube is forced to display the “Advertisement” mark

        They’re forced to identify that it’s an ad, but they don’t have to do it in a machine-readable way. There’s many different approaches to show an “Advertisement” or “Sponsored” label that appears to users but thar blockers can’t easily find.

    • SteveTech@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      For ergonomics, the plugin should be able to spot cuts in the video so you can easily select the correct frames.

      This shouldn’t even be too hard, I doubt YouTube is completely rerendering every video with ads, they’d just insert the ad in before an I frame in the video. So each ad will start with an I frame, and the video will resume on an I frame, meaning just let the user select all the I frames, no fancy cut detection algorithm is needed.

      I have no idea how to do this from JS though.

      Also I mean video I frames, not HTML iframes.

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Let’s go full guerilla: Plugin that lets you select the first and the last frame of an ad, thus allows to report the beginning and length to a synced database. When that frame is found in the buffer, skip X frames ahead.

      This would fit in well with SponsorBlock, which already does the same thing for different parts of videos (eg sponsored segments, intro and outro animations, non music segments in music videos, etc).

      I suspect YouTube will find ways around this, like running ads of differing lengths, add random amounts of padding at the start of the video or between ads, etc.

  • urheber@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    2 months ago

    fucking YouTube, am i right?

    no seriously, havent used it in months, and weirdly dont Miss it. i used to watch YouTube the whole day.

    • InfiniteGlitch@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      2 months ago

      May I ask what do you use for content instead of YouTube? A lot of certain people I follow are on YouTube and music that I listen to are often only on YouTube these days. Not even Spotify has the niche songs (mainly Arabic and Japanese songs).

      • urheber@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        well, i would never even think of using it for music (except downloading what i cant find) same with spotify (i hate streaming). I just watched regular videos, which I just suddenly don’t do anymore, I started binging TV shows instead, -no ads .

        I just couldn’t bare the ads, they’re that bad. and when I think of stuff that makes me mad, I can’t do anything associated with it, I.e. watch YouTube -know there will be ads (or not, because i have an adblocker) the mere thought that there WOULD be ads is so annoying to me, that I cannot stand watching YouTube.

        but yeah back to the point, TV shows, and books, especially books have been my replacement, and I must say, they are much better.

  • helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    2 months ago

    Maybe if they cleared out the scams and served more than 3 ads on repete, I wouldn’t feel the need to block them. Yes, no one likes ads, but I get its to pay for the content I’m watching for free.

    • lud@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      What makes you think they won’t block them or force ads to them as well?

      You do know that Invidious is still YouTube, right?

      • Optional@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s an open source front end to youtube, yes. So no ads on the sidebar, no bullshit about logging in, no garbage algorithm to be harassed by.

        And no commercials yet. If YT streams the ads and invidious doesn’t block them and adblocker doesn’t block them and PiHole doesn’t block them, I will not watch them.

        Death to Advertisement.

        • lud@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I don’t think YouTube cares if you refuses to watch their videos on another platform or not.

          They probably prefer if you didn’t. You only cost them money with no revenue whatsoever.

          • boywar3@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            They are still a metric they can peddle to their advertisers to show “how many people see this ad in a month.”