400

Seriously this was very surprising. I've been experimenting with GrayJay since it was announced and I largely think it's a pretty sweet app. I know there are concerns over how it isn't "true open source" but it's a hell of a lot more open than ReVanced. Plus, I like the general design and philosophy of the app.

I updated the YouTube backend recently and to my surprise and delight they had added support for SponsorBlock. However, when I went to enable it, it warned me "turning this on harms creators" and made me click a box before I could continue.

Bruh, you're literally an ad-blocking YouTube frontend. What kind of mental gymnastics does it take to be facilitating ad-blocking and then at the same time shame the end-user for using an extension which simply automates seeking ahead in videos. Are you seriously gonna tell me that even without Sponsorblock, if I skip ahead past the sponsored ad read in a video, that I'm "harming the creator"?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] crunchpaste@lemmy.dbzer0.com 158 points 7 months ago

I believe this is because sponsor segments are like traditional TV ads. They don't use trackers, they are not targeted and they respect your privacy.

[-] xep@kbin.social 117 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

They don’t use trackers, they are not targeted and they respect your privacy.

In that case it won't matter to anyone that I skipped them.

[-] crunchpaste@lemmy.dbzer0.com 67 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

As I've mentioned in another thread, I believe YouTube provides analytics on this (hence the "most replayed" parts for some videos), and I'm certain I've seen some creators mention sposors requiring that information before a deal is made. So it may really hurt some small youtubers that can't rely on merchandise sales.

That said, I personally use sponsorblock as I don't feel like wasting my life on nordvpn ads, but I have to admit sponsor segments are a whole lot better than regular YouTube ads.

Edit: And as I far as I know they pay much better than regular ads.

[-] infectoid@lemmy.world 30 points 7 months ago

I manually skip all sponsored segments except for the Internet Historian ones.

[-] sexy_peach@feddit.de 13 points 7 months ago
[-] infectoid@lemmy.world 18 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Pretty much. I watch all the NordVPN Man ads and don’t even sign up for a 12 month discount and the first month free. I’m basically a criminal.

Also Mullvad FTW.

[-] PopShark@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

My man Windscribe always forgotten about

[-] SchizoDenji@lemm.ee -2 points 7 months ago

Localscriptman also does really creative ones.

[-] WarmApplePieShrek@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 7 months ago

And Some More News

[-] Scrollone@feddit.it 6 points 7 months ago

The most replayed section won't count your view anyway since you're watching through an unofficial app that doesn't send tracking data to YouTube

[-] Draconic_NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 7 months ago

It's true that YouTube does track the most watched portions of a video, but in the case of clients like NewPipe or this one the way the video is parsed it doesn't send the analytic data necessary, so it likely doesn't even count views, let alone watched segments.

[-] MigratingtoLemmy@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

I wish there was an add-on that could fake a view for the sponsored segment for the creator but skip it for the user. I.e. every time the user skips a sponsored segment, the extension adds a view for the sponsored segment for the creator, so they get paid whilst we skip their segment.

[-] joyjoy@lemm.ee 12 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

They don’t use trackers,

Well, they can see whether you watched them or not. So technically still tracked. At least in the official youtube app.

[-] EnderofGames@sh.itjust.works 4 points 7 months ago

They can see the percentage of people who watched that part of the video, as part of the video analytics. This doesn't track the user, though, at least not if you have history turned off, or are using another front end.

[-] crunchpaste@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 7 months ago

And I'd guess that's done in the backend instead of the frontend. They should be able to know how many times their server steamed a part of a video.

[-] Draconic_NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Well when a video is buffered it's loaded in memory but not viewed yet, they can't count loading the video as a view or they'd count the whole video as viewed if you simply buffered it in full, it would also screw up that watched timestamps feature to see which part has been played back most.

So yes they can count how many times it has been streamed but they also need to know you've watched it because sitting on pause while the video buffers all the way through isn't a view, it isn't watching those segments, but it does stream them from the servers, in the same way Newpipe and Grayjay does. Which is how a video can register no views despite being watched on something like NewPipe.

load more comments (45 replies)
this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2023
400 points (87.2% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

52563 readers
327 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-FiLiberapay


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS