HumanPersonYoutube adblock blocking
KururinIf you use uBlock origin you would never see it. I use both PiHole + uBlock origin and I would never see it lmao.
Pihole does nothing on YouTube as their ads are served on the save server as the videos.
I know, but they help with the ads on the website itself. Not the videos.
But you have ublock? It’s just redundant at that point.
Nato BoramIt would help on other websites and on some in-app ads from mobile devices
Yes but on the same browser it is redundant.
Redundancies being a bad thing is a very capitalist point of view.
how? lol
In a capitalist POV, redundancy is just unneeded cost for things that are "not needed".
In an engineering POV redundancy is insurance to make sure things work as needed even when part of the system fails.
For example, Apollo flight computers were triple redundant, and the outputs from all three were compared before being fed into engines. If two outputs would be 0.98, but one was 0.12, it's most likely that the third one is wrong and should be discarded. This makes it very likely that correct control intput is given to the engines all times and the whole thing would not crash and burn because of a random bit flip.
What? PiHole doesn’t block YouTube ads yet. It’s needed. Having two Adblock’s isn’t a problem either.
It’s needed. no it’s not. It’s convenient, but not needed. Same goes for adblockers, they are not needed, but are very convenient. Having two Adblock’s isn’t a problem either. Yes it is. Is there any advantage to having 4 different adblock extensions on your browser? No, it only increases the attack surface to your browser. PiHole is useful for everything but web browsing since you can use an adblocker, such as ublock origin.
Pihole works wonders for mobile apps in general. Especially games. Ublock and pihole are similar but different enough to use both. Yes, ublock is overall better for browsers. But for network wide coverage, including smart TV’S, mobile apps, iot stuff like ring cameras etc.
I agree with this since I myself use PiHole, but it is redundant on a browser which uses ublock - and that was my original point.
Pinhole would be the “whole house/device” Adblock protection. Ublock is the one device Adblock. Fair to use both in my opinion.
uBlock is NOT redundant as many ads today are not served from 3rd party domains. PiHole is redundant as it doesn’t do crap.
do you realise that ublock origin blocks ads from remote domains right? Enable “I am an advanced user” and be shocked to see how many external resources it allows and blocks.
Did you even read my comment?
Did you read mine? Like how fucking stupid are you to just regurgitate my exact point.
But you have ublock? [PiHole] is redundant at that point
How do you know that? I’m fairly certain that google can tell if they have served you an ad, and cutting off access to their streaming services seems like a straightforward thing from their point of view. How could ublock (or anything) prevent google from blocking the stream? It’s not about blocking ads, or blocking messages to turn your adblocker off. It’s about google acknowledging that they haven’t served you an ad. You can’t force them to serve a video, I don’t think.
This “feature” is being rolled out slowly, which probably means they are taking lots of telemetry about how users try to circumvent this. It also means that just because you or I haven’t seen it does not mean we are safe against it. I’m not saying there is no solution, but I don’t think the solution is an adblocker or a sinkhole.
Interesting! So if I’m understanding correctly, the scare about YouTube stopping adblocked users was being caused by the Enhancer for Youtube extension? If so, that’s a relief.
Not really. The “Enhancer for YouTube” was causing problem with the YouTube anti-block to show up. So disabling what effetely allowed uBlock to block those anti-Adblock notices. I think they now fixed the issues with “Enhancer for YouTube” extension.
PeachManUhhhhh not quite, the fact that we’re probably not going to see the “stop blocking ads plz” message doesn’t mean that Youtube can’t block access to their website with an adblocker. It’s entirely possible, there are websites that already do it.
I use Adblock Plus on my desktop, and I have not had the message yet.
I recommend Ublock Origin over Adblock Plus with Adblock Plus whitlisting some ads.
Are you talking about the option you can untick in the settings?
Generally I’m going to opt for the ad blocker that doesn’t whitelist by default, and Ublock Origin is often recommended over Adblock Plus. I haven’t seen a reason to use Adblock Plus over Ublock Origin.
It’s one recommended by privacyguides, and if you use Firefox on Android also available to use there.
Your choice is understandable, I haven’t come across any reason to switch as of this moment however.
no. never seen (yet). and using adblock is perfectly fine.
I don’t even use browser to watch youtube vids anymore. Freetube -> mpv with sponsorblock plugin.
Freetube is basically another browser though (Chrome in a shell to only browse YouTube) with a few fancy plugins.
You can achieve all of that in a browser more or less.
You can achieve all of that in a browser more or less.
I know the topic of whether adblock is piracy is debated
Its not debated. Its bullshit.
flat earthers existing doesnt put the earth's sensual curves up for debate either.
nicetriangleThe argument that it is piracy is as stupid as saying my not paying attention to ads while watching antenna tv is piracy
pirate526Exactly. You’re being fed HTML etc and then deciding how to render it (or part of it in the case of ad blocking). This isn’t piracy. There’s no rules that come with the HTML in terms of how to render it. Different browsers can render it a number of different ways so how is not rendering part of it any different?
It is indeed a ludicrous idea.
Please drink verification can.
j4yc33It's Cybersecurity.
100%
Absolutely.
Adblocking is good cybersecurity practice. It puts into stark relief how much of Marketing is actually just manipulation and malware.
localhost TCP/UDPI agree that it isn’t but I didn’t want an argument in the comments.
It’s one of Lienus’s L takes. People are giving it the benefit of a doubt because he has a huge following. I started parroting “using a VPN to bypass region block is privateering” in response.
Why hyprocisy? It’s a fair point to say circumventing paying in some way is piracy. It’s possible, so anyone can decide for themselves.
The hypocrisy lies in Linus preaching “ad blocking is piracy” while taking VPN sponsors which enables piracy in another way.
Gotta work on that reading comprehension friend.
LTT also did videos about PiHole and YouTube Vanced, so I personally don’t think it’s hypocrisy advertising VPN’s (as long as those VPN ads don’t lie about it’s benefits).
I do believe that Linus once again uses words in way not commonly used. I.e. if they define piracy as
consuming content without paying how the creator intended
then blcoking ads is piracy. But the commonly used definition is more like wikipedia’s
[…] Online piracy or software piracy is the practice of downloading and distributing copyrighted works digitally without permission […]
If blocking ads is enough to constitute piracy then piracy ceases to lose meaning since then every act of using any website with an Adblocker is an act of piracy. At that point piracy becomes a meaningless phrase when even the FBI endorses the piracy tool.
For Linus to insinuate that a crime is being committed by comparing it to piracy is ridiculous, since last I checked there isn’t a country where adblocking is a crime. He can argue it’s morally unfair for people to legally visit YouTube and legally not disable Adblock to view his channel, but it’s not a crime. He’s basically implying that people should be running around without Adblockers on the web, which itself is a security risk to do. But, hey blocking ads is piracy and you wouldn’t want to be a criminal would you?
I don’t remember whether Linus said blocking ads is a crime. It isn’t a crime, and that’s really important.
At that point piracy becomes a meaningless phrase when even the FBI endorses the piracy tool.
I don’t think it’s right to call something a piracy tool. We have the similar discussions about “hacking tools”. Nmap can be used for commuting crimes, just like BitTorrent, the Internet or my kitchen knifes.
With this it isn’t a problem for the FBI to promote “piracy tools”, since almost everything can be used for good and legal purposes. uBlock is one of the most important tools to be secure on the internet, just like nmap to make sure systems are secure.
He can argue it’s morally unfair for people to legally visit YouTube and legally not disable Adblock to view his channel, but it’s not a crime.
Agreed.
Yeah, I brought up the crime aspect, since piracy to me is an act where laws are being broken that can result in fines or imprisonment. Pirates were outlaws and hanged, so kind of reason why digital lawbreakers got the moniker pirate. Not really in the category of even legal malicious compliance.
Was meant to draw attention to how ridiculous it was to even label a completely legal action as an act of piracy just because he was upset about adblockers. Might as well call out Brave browser next with it blocking ads out the box.
SpiritreaderYeah it's even more ridiculous when you apply this logic to sponsored segments.
It's an ad, I skip it by seeking in the video, therefore it is piracy?
Also, people get arrested and fined for piracy where I live (because it is, well, illegal), so people blocking ads should go to prison?
When the face of LMG talks about things like this in a main channel video the should look into the consequences of the opinion they present.
Excuse the language, but what the actual fuck was Linus thinking?
Agreed. People need to stop giving that ridiculous idea market share in their head.
But it is you are using the service without “paying” for it. What would you rather call?
People typically associate piracy with actions that can land individuals in legal trouble due to it being law breaking. I don’t know that there is a country yet that sentences people for using Adblocker. Even the FBI recommends it.
Like I can see how companies don’t like people consuming their service without seeing ads, but this isn’t people copying or cracking and stealing account credentials to get access to something that is paywalled like some Netflix account. This is a flaw on their end and people are accessing it legally.
It’s like some drive in theater getting mad someone who lives across from there can just watch movies from their backyard without paying and then saying they are committing piracy. They aren’t sneaking into a theater.
Name is OptionalI won’t use the term “piracy”. Just because the man says up is down doesn’t make it so. Piracy, historically is using threat of force and/or harm to force capitulation. In history past, pirates would fire across the bow to allow the target to choose to fight/flee or capitulate and pay the pirates, which is extortion. Technically, ransomware hackers are, by the historical definition, the true pirates. Individuals watching videos without ads is, by definition, individuals watching videos without ads.
Another issue which is connected to labeling users “pirates” is the data caps and bandwidth throttling by mobile carriers and ISPs. User make agreements with carriers for data and bandwidth for x.x price, but YouTube “steals” data limits and bandwidth by ads. Shouldn’t we expect them to pay us for our lost bandwidth and data caps?
It can’t be a one way street for a corporation to label users as unethical reprobates or “pirates” while he steals my paid for data limits and bandwidth.
BurstarService is still paid for with user’s data, including the datapoint: is intolerant of ads.
wolfshadowheartFrom my understanding it has only been rolled out to Chrome users so far. Anyone using adblocks with Firefox will not have seen these yet.
However to ensure you don't, I suggest beginning your transition to some of the alternatives. I have been migrating to Piped which is essentially a scraper.
MbeezerPiped ftw!
LollerCorleoneI use Firefox with ublock origin and haven't seen it yet.
BugKillaI do the same. I also run pfSense with the pfBlockerNG module pulling in lists that block ad (and a tonne of other) sources. Also have a look at pihole as it can do a similar function.
DNS blocking does not block youtube ads.
Gloop TamerI use it on iOS with uYou+ and I haven’t seen it, I also used Video Lite’s Adblock as well as on Safari with normal ublock and haven’t seen it either. Maybe it’s not on mobile yet
GeneratorAdblock is piracy!
Just use Pided (piped.video), Invidious, Freetube or something else.
Youtube website is just trash bloated with JavaScript and trackers.
Most of YouTube viewing I do is on Roku. Are there any Roku/ATV/Tizen/webOS apps that I can use to watch videos on Piped instead?