• youmaynotknow@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    2 days ago

    Gotta give it to them. They are extremely innovative in coming up with ways of enshitifying stuff.

    • plebeian@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’m willing to bet my left nut that they will rename it as such in the future.

  • PieMePlenty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    2 days ago

    Ahh classic, punishing paying costumers while pirates don’t have to deal with any of this shit. I guess the beatings will continue until profits increase!

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 days ago

    “There aren’t enough seeds for these AI training data torrents we’ve been downloading. Anybody got any ideas?”

  • HalfSalesman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    I’m on my brother’s premium. I told myself if my brother stopped wanting to pay for it I’d pay for it myself because I hate ads that much.

    On the other hand, if Youtube itself takes it away from me I’m going to just stop watching Youtube.

      • xvertigox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’m using Grayjay on android, I wonder how the feature set compares to Revanced? I like that Grayjay has sponsorblock built in.

    • olympicyes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      On desktop, check out VacuumTube which is app that acts as a wrapper for YouTube Leanback (tv/console version) and has ad blocking built in.

  • airportline@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Google really seems to want to disincentivize people paying for YouTube Premium rather than just downloading an ad blocker.

    • Soup@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 days ago

      Yea. I mean, I pay for it right now because it’s easy and works on all my stuff but frankly they’re really making me weigh how much convenience really matters. This kinda behaviour’s pretty garbo.

  • Hayduke@lemmy.world
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    244
    ·
    3 days ago

    I have to hand it to them, they are really good at finding new, innovative ways to make the platform worse.

    • etchinghillside@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Deactivated Premium recently. I used their music app when driving – expecting some ads now - nope, it just doesn’t allow running in the background anymore.

      Seems like such a hostile thing - I’d like to think running ads would be a positive net income for them. (Now that I think of it - maybe they don’t have it built out into their music service.)

      • Broken@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 days ago

        Makes me long for the days of google music. It just worked. Streamed stuff and even allowed you to stream your own library that you had stored in drive. I would use that in the car. Then they ditched it for YouTube music, which was a worse experience and lacked the features.

    • sunbeam60@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      74
      ·
      3 days ago

      If you pay, the platform remains great. I get a discounted YouTube premium membership through my mobile phone company. I think YouTube is great, I never see ads, lots of features.

      Just to offer an alternative view.

      • techt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Weird number of downvotes here – I thought they were meant for low-effort or non contributive comments, not an “I disagree” button. This person is giving a unique perspective as a subscriber (in this thread, anyway) and should be met with curiosity, I think. It is helpful to know that there are people who enjoy paying for it, so thanks for giving your opinion here.

        I disagree because they have a dominant position for reasons other than having a good product – they squash competition trying to make the space better while themselves actively making it worse. Subscribing means supporting that style of inhibiting innovation, not to mention the other user-hostile practices they embrace (extend, extinguish). They are an ad company and obligated to make a profit, I get that, but I refuse to abide this style of using investor money to operate at a loss for years while deceptively capturing the market before raising prices. If your product is good, it shouldn’t need to be artificially propped up.

        • Michael@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          but I refuse to abide this style of using investor money to operate at a loss for years while deceptively capturing the market before raising prices.

          Indeed, no company should be praised or rewarded for emulating the moves that made companies like Walmart and Amazon big.

          This capitalist hellscape would be slightly more tolerable if there was ample competition in every space. Companies need to be motivated to make their profit in ways that please the consumer, but also in ways that are increasingly more ethical.

          But truly, as they say, there is no ethical consumption under capitalism. Modern slavery and third-world exploitation…even literal child slavery are rampant in our supply chains and offshore manufacturing.

          Even Google indirectly uses child slavery. The court threw the case raised against them (and other giants) out last year because these companies simply purchase “unspecified amounts” of cobalt through “global supply chains” - never mind how it came to be on the global supply chain to begin with and how much obscene profit these companies make off these resources.

      • archonet@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        35
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        3 days ago

        “If you just give them your wallet right away, the mugging isn’t so bad, really. They didn’t even kick my teeth in!” 🤓

        • sunbeam60@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          arrow-down
          47
          ·
          3 days ago

          It’s a product. You can buy it or not. If you don’t think it’s worth it, stay away, or stay on the free tier. You’re acting as if you’ve got some kind of right to use a service that’s provided by a commercial entity.

          • archonet@lemy.lol
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            63
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            and it’s a multi-billion dollar corporation, that already makes more money than you or I will ever see in our lifetimes, that actively strives to make the user experience worse for people who don’t pay, when they’ve got a practical monopoly in the “free video sharing platform” market. And you’re whiteknighting for them. 🤡

            • Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              19
              ·
              3 days ago

              more money than you or I will ever see in our lifetimes

              I mean, I feel like you need to expand your comparison a little as the amount that you’ll see in your lifetime is such a minute grain of sand on a beech compared to corporate profits. The money they made today, hell, in the last hour… minute… will dwarf the amount that you will likely see.

            • reev@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              14
              ·
              3 days ago

              actively strives to make the user experience worse for people who don’t pay

              And evidently those who do! My parents live in a different country. What are they, not my family? What’s the family plan for? (Rhetorical question)

              With Vanced I have so many more options to customize my experience. I can hide shorts I never watch, set a fixed resolution for data and wifi, return the stupid dislike ratio they removed… And if I’m using Vanced anyway to fix all the issues they introduce, why on earth would I additionally pay for their service?

              I want to pay for their shit, especially to support content creators, but I can’t support a platform whose singular mission it is to make everything worse for everyone constantly. Feels like every month I have to get a new extension to undo some horrible design decision.

            • sunbeam60@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              3 days ago

              By Darwin you see a lot. I was merely stating that I think YouTube premium is worth the price I pay for it.

              Is there no product you are satisfied with? Your life must be pretty bleak.

            • FishFace@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              3 days ago

              whiteknighting

              was a weak-ass criticism when it was on 4chan being leveled at anyone who said anything not derogatory about a woman, and it’s weak-ass now. Oh no, someone on the internet has an at-least-partially positive opinion of a company, how awful, we’d better stereotype and body-shame them for it.

              If you had your way, the only comments about YouTube - or any other product from a large company - that would be allowed would be negative ones. How the fuck does that make sense?

          • elucubra@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            I’m willing to sacrifice some of my valuable internet points here and be down voted to low hell.

            I was going to make a comment along those lines.

            They are, at the core, an ad company. Their motivation is to make money, and we are free to pay or not pay for their services.

            The idea that we have a right to a non essential product for free is entitlement. They make a shit load of money, but also pay money to most content creators. Could they provide a service where they essentially just pay for costs? Sure, but no for profit Corp is going to do that, it has to make money somehow. While I’m all for peer tube, I really don’t know if it’s sustainable.

            I wonder how many of the people who demand free access to services donate to FOSS Development.

            Maybe some form of consumer co-op, where users essentially pay for operating costs, could be an option.

          • lobut@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            I’ll join you in the downvotes. There’s many reasons to hate YouTube. Asking them to pay for video content to everyone for free is a bit silly.

            I’m also not saying you shouldn’t use alternatives or run an ad-blocker. Those are cool. I just find it funny how someone is saying: “I get some benefit in paying for this service” results in such backlash, lol.

            • sunbeam60@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              3 days ago

              I know. I thought we were upvoting respectful debate, not having a popularity contest. But apparently not…

            • sunbeam60@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              3 days ago

              YouTube steals other people’s work?

              I tend to watch content creators who willingly put their content on YouTube. Am I missing something here…?

              • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                3 days ago

                You are missing something. Multiple things actually.

                • most content isn’t uploaded by the copyright holder (e.g. TV excerpts)
                • demonetized videos will still have ads (at least for people without ad blockers)
                • videos are used for machine learning without credit to authors or financial compensation (especially without consent when it’s not the copyright holder uploading them)
      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        3 days ago

        Wow, shilling for YouTube premium and anti-net-neutrality (the “discount through your phone company” part) in one comment.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            Not allowing ISPs to pick and choose winners among web services is absolutely what Net Neutrality is about. Bundling or discounting subscriptions isn’t technically the same thing as zero-rating, but the end result of making a particular ISP-preferred service cheaper than alternatives is the same.

            • FishFace@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              3 days ago

              You’re just trying to piggyback on a vaguely-related concept that your audience already likely hates. Call things what they are, not what would be convenient to you if they were.

        • sunbeam60@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          Is recommending a product that you’re satisfied with “shilling”?

          Is there a product in this world that you think is worth the price? Does that make you a shill?

      • Broken@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        I’m OK with your opinion and I appreciate hearing an alternate view to offset the echo chamber effect.

        But for a lot of us, or at least me, its far deeper than just cost and ads.

        It’s the fact that steps keep being taken to make the platform worse. They don’t want the platform usable unless you pay, and in this case they’re even taking a stab at the people who pay…you don’t pay enough in their mind.

        If they had balls, they would just make it a closed platform. Pay to access, and restrict that per account IP. But they’d rather gaslight everybody and slowly turn up he heat so the frogs don’t jump out of the pot. This way they maximize their profits for longer. Point of all of that is, they don’t care about he platform or service at all.

        For me, its not even about that. Their algorithm was so jacked up I was sick of being fed videos I didn’t want to see over and over, and videos I’ve already watched over and over. That’s why they added the subscription bell…because you would subscribe to things you wanted to watch and they never showed it to you. It wasn’t “you” tube it was “their” tube.

        I bailed on them years ago. I still watch some content on there because there really isn’t a viable alternative. I use a scraper that gives me a feed of just what I want and without ads. I watch what I like and move on with my day. I’m back in control of my video viewing.

      • overload@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 days ago

        Do you have a means of removing sponsors on the mobile app though? Revanced has sponsorblock and adblock in the app.

        • sunbeam60@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 days ago

          You mean removing sponsor led segments inside a video? Sort of. The jump ahead feature, which I think is a premium feature, allows you to jump in the video based on where everywhere else is jumping in the video. So when a sponsored segment starts and you skip forward 30s (double tap on mobile, ‘k’ on PC) you are offered to jump ahead. You click that and you get to the end of the sponsored segment.

  • AlexLost@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    Seems there is a market for spoofing specific IP addresses out there. What if they don’t know you are not at home? I ha e no clue how any of this works…

    • rumba@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      You just install tailscale on a home computer, tell it it’s an exit node. Install tailscale on your phone and your laptop and whatever other computers you have.

      Boom, VPN home and use your home IP.

  • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    ·
    3 days ago

    Meanwhile on Steam my “family” consists of 3 adults with different addresses, last names, and credit cards, who have had accounts for decades and never lived at the same place.

    We have full access to each other’s library.

      • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        My understanding is that gaben has already put an action plan in place for when the company moves on from his leadership.

        From what I’ve heard of it, the people in line behind Gabe will be upholding the same values.

        We should have at least another ~40 years or more of this before sometimes entitled brat inherits the company and sells it off to a foreign interest.

        With all that being said: long live gaben.

      • BackgrndNoize@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2 days ago

        Man I hope he lives to a 100 at least, why am I always late to the party, I learn about Limewire and it dies the next year, I get access to my sister’s Netflix account and Netflix goes to shit, I’m finally able to afford a gaming laptop and buy Steam games and now I’m too busy and tired from work to play them and Gabe is getting older. I wish I could go back in time and do things differently

        • Bennyboybumberchums@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          2 days ago

          Instead of wishing it was the past, imagine its the future and you want to go back to now to tell yourself something. What would that be?

          • BackgrndNoize@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 days ago

            I’d tell myself to start investing my money and hit the gym, but I’m unemployed right now and I know once I’m employed again finding the time in this rat race is gonna be difficult but I’m gonna start valuing my time more seriously, I’ve uninstalled doom scroll apps like Instagram and I’m working on time blocking my tasks, hopefully that pays off

            • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              2 days ago

              Good for you! I hope you find a good job soon.

              In the meantime, I recommend doing some exercise because that’s something you can completely control your progress on. If you don’t have a gym membership, body weight workouts are absolutely a thing you should check out.

      • Soggy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Gaben is gonna be the first person to digitally upload their consciousness.

      • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Sure, the 2 constants in the universe are Entropy and Enshitification. When Steam turns to shit I’ll go back to Piracy just like I did when Netflix went to shit.

        My point is that companies don’t have to be shit about account sharing and family plans, and people don’t have to accept it.

      • Kay Ohtie@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        It’s mostly that a feature on it went from “okayish” to “far more consumer-friendly”, which was incredibly unexpected of them to do. Everyone figured Steam library sharing would die but instead they roll out Family that has far looser restrictions than the system they’d had for over a decade.

        Can’t play the same game at the same time unless both own it, and DLC isn’t shared, but my partner being able to play anything I own that I’m not playing is pretty rad of a positive change.

        Meanwhile Nintendo’s system got worse instead.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 days ago

        It’s pretty fantastic! In the past, you could share a library, and playing any game from that library would lock the entire library so others couldn’t use it at the same time. Today, that is loosened up and is much nicer to use.

    • sfjvvssss@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      How do you add new people? I tried and a prompt told me that we don’t seem to share a household.

      • AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 days ago

        I had that error a couple of times, and it inexplicably resolved itself. Try having the person join again (which may require a new invite). I think only 1 out of 4 members of my family were able to join without that initial error message. This was back when Steam had just switched how they handled family sharing, so I assumed it was just an implementation bug of some sort. One of my friends took three attempts before they could join, but it worked ¯_(ツ)_/¯

        Though I will note that steam family sharing no longer works if the person is located in another country for the purposes of Steam billing region (so my Norwegian friend could not join my UK family)

        • Jeffool @lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 days ago

          That’s the old way of handling it. (And I think it still works.) They have a new implementation that’s just the family group admin sending an invite and the recipient accepting.

            • Jeffool @lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              After I made my comment I saw someone else make a comment about getting a message saying that. I never did. Mine just worked. Weird.

        • sfjvvssss@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          If one changes their password afterwards, will the share persist? Old Steam family sharing broke after changing the passwords.

  • neon_nova@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    2 days ago

    I absolutely hate this stuff. My family doesn’t live in the same house, but it doesn’t mean we are not a family. My mother-in-law and sister-in-law just message us for the passwords when they want to stream something. None of us pay for youtube premium and it looks like I won’t be.

  • moonburster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    For those select few that have an iPhone

    You have a few options:

    • be EU citizen and sideload a cracked YouTube (similar to vanced, but you need certificates on iOS which sucks)
    • pay for a dev account and sideload regardless of above
    • buy two apps: vinegar and AdGuard. AdGuard speaks for itself, vinegar is a tool that forces YouTube to use the html 5 player inside of safari and thus forcing it to your will

    I know iPhones are hated here, but I saw the android will stop sideloading coming from a mile away. At least here in the eu apple can suck one and I can still sideload whatever I want

    • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      You can sideload up to three apps without a paid dev account, they just expire in 7 days. Use something like AltStore (or better yet SideStore) and you have an easy way to install and re-sign two other apps. They also have the ability to essentially “offload” apps so you can have more than two other sideloaded apps, but only two can be active at a time (other than the signing app)

      • moonburster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Yeah or services as Signulous could take a bit of strain away if you don’t want to be limited by the 7 days and 3 apps limit

  • x4740N@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    God forbid you have a parent who’s living away from home for work purposes who’s using that subscription

    • RagingRobot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 days ago

      Yeah and you are also already paying for a set number of people that can use the account so why would it make a difference where they live? My brother is still my family even if we don’t live in the same state. They didn’t call it a household plan

      • NotKyloRen@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        They don’t care about whether they live with you or not. It’s about providing less service than what you’re paying for. Like how mobile carriers say, “unlimited data*” – *after 25GB, we [may] slow your connection speed to 256kbps. So this way, it’s “5 accounts*” – *they must physically live with you. So now you’re paying for 5 accounts, where 3 or 4 of them technically are unusable.

        Why? Money. Those other people who you would have shared with now need to get their own account(s). Suddenly, “profits are through the roof!” – until the next big squeeze. At this point, Google is squeezing its customers like a dry tube of toothpaste.