[HN Gopher] Google is intentionally throttling YouTube, slowing ...
___________________________________________________________________
Google is intentionally throttling YouTube, slowing down users with
ad blockers
Author : basisword
Score : 11 points
Date : 2025-06-17 21:45 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.windowscentral.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.windowscentral.com)
| bitpush wrote:
| In HN's opinion, what should a company do when users are actively
| trying to subvert it from making money?
|
| Imagine a situation where someone walks into Apple Store to
| explicitly steal iPhones. Is Apple justfied in preventing the
| person from entering? If you think "steal" is a bridge too far,
| lets say someone walks into Apple Store with an expectation to
| chat with the employees, goof around with display units,
| preventing legitimate customers from accessing them - will the
| company be justified in preventing that behavior?
| basisword wrote:
| Google can do what they want but they handle this poorly in my
| opinion.
|
| First of all they seem to apply the adblocker checking at
| random instead of on everyone. They won't do that because they
| know it'll cost them.
|
| Secondly, I use Safari and can simply 'reload page without
| content blockers' to allow ads and disable the extension on the
| current page - Google doesn't accept this. You have to fully
| disable your adblocker extension at the browser level before
| they'll let you back in. They are 100% doing that so that you
| stop blocking Google ads on non-Google sites.
| bitpush wrote:
| > First of all they seem to apply the adblocker checking at
| random instead of on everyone. They won't do that because
| they know it'll cost them.
|
| How does applying adblocker detect at random cost YouTube?
| deshittify wrote:
| Once upon a time, advertisements were intended to be watched by
| people. Now, the advertisements are watching people.
| Surveillance capitalists are the parasites turning your private
| information into their profits. I refuse to acknowledge
| invasive racketeering as a legitimate business.
| bitpush wrote:
| It is natural for someone to object to a company's business
| practices. Millions of people dont eat meat, or consume dairy
| products due to ethical or moral considerations.
|
| Most of those people stop giving such companies business.
| Some of them go and protest, but if I understand you
| correctly you're saying one has to go into a McDonalds and
| consume their burgers, and then complain?
| SunlitCat wrote:
| Funny that you mention Apple Stores. There's a widely
| circulated video showing a masked man walking into an Apple
| Store, yanking all the display units off the tables, and
| walking right out, without anyone trying to stop him. No
| intervention. No security. Just quiet compliance from staff and
| onlookers.
|
| [0] https://www.youtube.com/shorts/AcUU9snHMe4
| explain wrote:
| Old news
| legitster wrote:
| Whether or not you like Google or their practices, I don't
| necessarily understand people who insist on getting something for
| free and also get upset about the service. There are many
| bad/unreasonable things YouTube does but this is the least
| objectionable, imho.
|
| As the saying go, "if the product is free, you are the product".
| Pay for your stuff, or you degrade yourself.
|
| I'll just say that Youtube Premium has been a good value and
| there's comfort knowing that creators get a ton more revenue from
| my views.
| blacksmith_tb wrote:
| Part of what convinced me to pay for Premium was confirming
| that Goog didn't seem to care if I used an adblocker if I was
| also paying.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-06-17 23:01 UTC)