Mashable reports that users ran into a black screen on YouTube, and that it stayed for about 6 seconds before the video began playing. The reports indicate it affected several browsers including Firefox, Edge, Vivaldi.

Some users joked that they would rather see a black screen than an ad. While that’s certainly a better experience, it does waste precious seconds of our time. A simple workaround for the black screen on YouTube is to just refresh the page, hit F5 as soon as the page starts loading. uBlock Origin’s filters were updated with a patch to resolve the problem, the add-on updates its filters automatically. If you are still experiencing the black screen issue, just open the extension’s dashboard and manually update the filters. This tug-of-war is getting annoying, but it appears to me that Google’s efforts are actively promoting the use of ad blockers, instead of attracting new subscribers.

    • A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      It could also go the other way and someone could sue Google or other companies. Web browsers and ad blockers run on the client not the server, generally with the authorisation of the owner of said client system. It is a technical measure to prevent unauthorised code (i.e. unwanted ads) from running on the system, imposed by the owner of the system. Anti ad blocker tech is really an attempt to run software on someone’s computer by circumventing measures the owner of said computer has deployed to prevent that software from running, and has not authorised it to run. That sounds very similar to the definition of computer fraud / abuse / unauthorised access to a computer system / illegal hacking in many jurisdictions.

      • KnoLord@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Axel Springer tried again recently, arguing that ad blockers “infringe copyright by altering HTML elements on their sites”, and Germany waits, because a similar lawsuit happened in Luxembourg which will be settled on the European level.

        https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/bundesgerichtshof-will-entscheidung-auf-europaeischer-ebene-abwarten-104.html (in German)

        Another article, where they tried the exact same thing two years ago: https://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/web/landgericht-hamburg-ueber-adblock-plus-springer-verlag-verliert-erneut-a-5e058ee7-e0fa-4f0e-aa10-d95d9cfad654 (also in German)

        (Also it’s not a constutional right (Verfassungsrecht), since it wasn’t the BVerfG that ruled in the first case (they tried to get them to rule, but no response was given), but a civil case ruled in the first instance by the BGH, after the local courts told Axel Springer to get bent)

        (Edited: Added more context)

        • viking@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Ah nice, thanks for the update and correction! Hope Axel Springer will get shafted for good. Nothing of value comes from their publications.

          • KnoLord@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Agreed. Even though I dislike Eyeo’s practices as well (letting the ad companies pay for whitelisting their ads), it’s a better outcome than outright banning ad blockers (or if Axel Springer had gotten their ways, “light” web-browsing via reader modes would have been turned illegal as well)

        • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          ad blockers “infringe copyright by altering HTML elements on their sites”,

          LOL that’s like saying you’re infringing copyright if you rip a page out of a book or magazine.

          • R...@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            More like putting a post-it on the ads in magazines. You are not altering anything for the next person, or even for yourself after reloading a page.

  • MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I thought the whole point of server side ads was that they are embedded in the video, not blockable?

    • FiveMacs@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Just because a company makes lots of money, doesn’t mean they know wtf they are doing or are smart.

      • Xeroxchasechase@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Sure they know! Every level of middle managers knows exactly what the status of the graphs of goals and progress of their team!

    • Pika@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      this is true if the client itself has no knowledge of what is ads and what isn’t, so like if they have no skip to time feature, no clickable links etc. Otherwise the plugin could just search for those elements and mute or skip if they are present.

      with YouTube it just adds another layer of complexity for ad blockers

    • tabular@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Presumably the implementation is not as seamless as that, and 3rd party clients do not handle it like 1st party ones.

  • Teknikal@eviltoast.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I think this is going to continue to the point we have AI adblockers that edit the files free of ads for us in real-time. Then hopefully the technology jumps to Televisions etc.

    Google’s really helping it along in that direction.

    • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Before Sponsorblock I had an idea of abusing YT’s auto-generated subtitles to auto-skip ads in a very rough manner

      • themoonisacheese@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Someone has apparently toyed with the idea of using AI to detect sponsor segments in subtitles to generate sponsorblock segments. I don’t think it went anywhere though.

        • 𝒍𝒆𝒎𝒂𝒏𝒏@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          The community is ridiculously fast at submitting segments IME, especially on tech-oriented channels. Tubular even allows you to submit segments right from within the app which is really handy.

          I feel the benefits of automatically detecting them (AI or otherwise) would be easier to realize at a larger scale - sounds really interesting though. Training such a thing probably wouldn’t be too difficult seeing as we have a massive library of timestamps in Sponsorblock’s database

  • QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    GrayJay has also been very quick to push updates. I haven’t had any issues watching YouTube videos on there. Hopefully more content creators will continue to spread out across multiple services so that there’s better competition with YouTube.

  • 1995ToyotaCorolla@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    While that’s certainly a better experience, it does waste precious seconds of our time

    Time not having [corporation]'s advertisements shoved in my face is time well spent

  • snooggums@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Some users joked that they would rather see a black screen than an ad.

    This isn’t a joke. I would literally rather see a black screen than an ad.

    • bountygiver [any]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Also before the better twitch adblock that let you bypass adtime with a lower quality video, people do literally use the plugin that replaced the ads with purple screen.

    • Pika@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Fully agree, I YouTube a lot for white noise as I fall asleep, and while I’ve had premium for a few years now the advertisements that I had before premium were much higher volume then anything else and I would much rather have no audio than a random advertisement blasting

    • Jessica@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I can’t be fucked to set up a pi hole so YouTube on my Roku in the living room had ads. I unironically mute the tv and check my phone during ads. I’d take a black screen any day

  • Lvxferre@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I can’t wait for the day that saying “youtube” makes people say “what’s this? a peertube instance?”.

    • bluGill@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      i can’t wait for the day content is there. I always look there first but too often I can’t find anything close to what I want.

    • thehatfox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      We probably need a few more years of network and storage improvements to make open video platforms properly viable. Video data is big and bandwidth is expensive, which makes keeping servers running over a certain size difficult.

  • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I find myself watching less and less youtube. Till is no longer part of my daily routine.

    I backed up a few videos that I loved using tubearchivists and move on to other platforms.

    I’m into small web and the fediverse now.

    • CrowAirbrush@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I remeber when it was all about the YOU part of tubin’. Real people making real content because they wanted to show it to you.

      When they first started getting paid they just made more of that same stuff, heck plenty of reviewers could even be trusted as they made the reviews on their own accord.

      It was my go to place for entertainment, information and to help me decide to get brand x or y for the product i need.

      Nowadays i just have it on as it’s less annoying than cable but nothing is actually interesting anymore. Mature youtubers who have turned into adhd 9yo olds just to try and stay relevant, people messing with annoying sounds effects just because they read it catches the viewers attention…video’s nowadays are an attack on my home space, constantly triggering me with noise or ads just to be annoying. It’s become exhausting to consume content.

      Same goes for instagram which i very much liked, it’s on constant mute for me and the only reason i’m still around is because it’s become a habit and titties.

    • mynameisigglepiggle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Ironically I’m enjoying it for the first time ever at the moment.

      We were going away on holidays and would have patchy internet and I needed to make sure my iPad addicted kids has plenty of content for the the road. I decided I was too old and too busy to spend hours stealing YouTube content with shitty apps and just bit the bullet, got a VPN and signed up for a family plan of YouTube plus through Nepal for like $4 / month.

      And now without ads and the bullshit I have for the first time found creators that I like, and I put on videos throughout the day. Also because it comes with music I actually use my google speaker for more than just alarms and timers because I refuse to buy Spotify.

      The $4 is actually good value. I’m as surprised as the next person.

      • ChapulinColorado@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I’ve seen videos mentioning they have started cancelling plans opened on a different region to save money using VPN software, so be careful how much you rely on it.

  • Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    What’s the endgame here for users?

    Do we just want a reasonable subscription price? Something we can genuinely afford?

    If youtube doesn’t play ads then they cant remain a service. At least not as it is today. Hosting costs money.

    Im not shilling for them, i dont want ads either. And google are a terrible company. But im trying to be realistic.

    Do we want cheap subscription?

    Or a reduced service that can be maintained without so many ads

    Do we just want 5 second skippable ads back?

    Im just seeing this fight progressing to the point were youtube becomes subscription only and the ad blocker users have to pay or lose the service they obviously want to access.

    • Emmie@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Me personally? I just want to watch them burn. Google I mean. This is my endgame

        • Emmie@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Yeah if we applied modern politics to corporations I think a lot of solid bbq could come out of it.

          We need to start to shit on exxon like we shit on republicans

    • coldy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I remember the days of tasteful ad banners on the internet. Those are long gone. Now everything has to be an obtrusive unskippable autoplay 30 second ad or cover half the screen.

      It is not reasonable the browse the internet without an adblocker anymore, regardless of privacy concerns…

    • sexual_tomato@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Do we just want a reasonable subscription price?

      Yay, basically. I paid for premium when I could afford it because I want the platform to keep working and I hate ads.

      Premium prices went up without a lot of value for me so I quit paying. Technically premium offers a lot but the core feature that I actually cared about (YouTube without ads) never changed in value. If I had the option of only paying for that, I’d do it. To me, YT is a higher priority than any other streaming service. But they don’t provide a way for me to only pay for the stuff I care about

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’m actually rediscovering YouTube right now. A few years back it seemed like too many attempts were a huge unskippable ad, for a short video. Ads were way too high a percentage. And even when a video was a bit longer, any attempt to scroll was met with more ads, and maybe getting reset to the beginning

      This time around, I typically see one ad, skippable after 5 seconds, then another every 15 minutes or so. While I’d rather not have ads, it’s not bad. Even better, content has matured enough in the years since I first tried it, that there’s actually longer stuff worth watching: the percentage of ad time is much lower, so I do get entertainment value rather than just be fed constant ads. I could watch that.

    • Ark-5@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’ve been toying with a “Pay Per View” model for a bit. But it’s sort of modified.

      Basically you can “pay what you want” on a per view basis. You as a user get to decide how valuable your view is and pay a creator that much each time you watch a video. Maybe this gets linked to watch time somehow to avoid people just spamming short content. YouTube presumably gets a cut to keep the lights on.

      Creators making actually good content will hopefully attract viewers willing and able to pay, and viewers that have the means and really like a creator can up the amount they are paying. This could be on a per channel basis, or just a blanket setting of I pay someone ¢10 a view or something.

      Idk, seems like a bit of a silly idea now I type it out

    • Coil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’d seriously consider a sub that just removed ads if the price is fair. I don’t give a shit about premium, red or whatever it’s called.

    • kintrix@linux.community
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I think the baseline of what I would want is:

      • Have actual moderation of the ads. Don’t allow malware ads, don’t allow porn ads etc
      • Don’t allow obtrusive ads, or at least categorize them and have preferences. Do NOT play my ads 2x the volume of whatever I was watching.
      • Don’t interrupt my video with ads. Play before or after. Ideally after, but I can see why that would not be feasible. I guess it is also feasable if the creator marks ad breaks, like the current-day sponsor segments.

      I genuinely thing Youtube premium is alrightish as it is. I wouldn’t pay for it; though, since I do not want to give my money to Google. They are getting enough out of me that I don’t want to give them.

      I honestly just want the alternatives, like PeerTube, to have a funding model, which allows creators to get paid. Donations? Sure. Optionally ads? Sure. I think peertube having opt-in ads that go for the creator would go a long way.

      • IdleSheep@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Don’t interrupt my video with ads. Play before or after. Ideally after, but I can see why that would not be feasible. I guess it is also feasable if the creator marks ad breaks, like the current-day sponsor segments.

        FYI ad placement and type is decided by the creator not youtube. If you see a video full of ads in the middle it’s because the creator of that video chose it to be so.

        • TheDarksteel94@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          That’s not necessarily true (though I’m sure in most cases it is). I remember cases where creators had to specifically ask Youtube support to disable mid-roll ads since they were disabled on the creators side but viewers still saw them. Also happened with non-monetized videos/channels. But it’s been at least a year since I saw the last case of that, so maybe Youtube has fixed it in the meantime.

    • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      They’re already harvesting my data. The greedy fuckers can fuck right off if they think I’m going to pay a subscription for that. It’s not as if Google isn’t profitable as it is. They just want more, and it will never be enough.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      There already is a subscription service, it’s called YouTube Red or Premium or something.

    • calcopiritus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Let creators choose: normal ads or sponsors. Not both. YouTube getting part of the sponsorship deal.

      If they choose ads, YouTube goes back to 1 shippable ad after 1 second.

      OR

      A subscription which is just “no ads”. No YouTube music, not Google drive, no nothing. Just a cheap “no ads” subscription.

      That being said, even if option 1 happens, I’m probably not uninstalling ublock. Once YouTube forced me to install it, it’s impossible to use the internet without it. Actions have consequences.

    • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      My problem is that paying for premium doesn’t actually remove the ads. YouTube fucked creators so hard that they started running their own sponsorship segments and product placements. So with premium I’m still paying to watch ads.

      • Psythik@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Well thankfully SponsorBlock still works whether or not you’re a Premium subscriber. There’s also always YouTube ReVanced for mobile (which has SponsorBlock built-in). There’s no reason to ever have to put up with an online ad, no matter the source.

        • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Sure but I’m not gonna pay for something I still have to actively fight with is the point.

  • doomi@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    A few years ago I‘ve been traveling in Morocco. And as long as I was there, YouTube didn’t show me any ads! Neither in the web player nor in the app (on iOS). Does anybody have a VPN with a server in Morocco to test if this is still working?