Firefox users are reporting an ‘artificial’ load time on YouTube videos. YouTube says it’s part of a plan to make people who use adblockers “experience suboptimal viewing, regardless of the browser they are using.”

  • FaceDeer@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    177
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Given that Google’s been talking about switching Chrome to a new plugin format that would limit the ability of adblockers to function on Chrome, and given that Google owns Youtube and profits from the ads Youtube displays…

    Nope, I’m not connecting the dots. Not sure why Google would be wanting people switch from Firefox to Chrome at this time.

    • ElleChaise@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      66
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s more obvious than that even; their SEC paperwork states that adblockers are a risk to their profits. That’s more than enough info to assume they’re going to go to war in the near future (now) with them.

      • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        38
        ·
        1 year ago

        They’ve always been at war with ad blockers. It’s just most major multinationals have matured or diversified to a point where they are functional monopolies, and no longer gain any value in competition or service improvement.

        At this stage of the merger and consolidation phase of global capitalism, with captured governments that won’t dare break them up or fine them more than a meek virtue signal, the most cost effective way to satiate the infinite growth of capitalism is to increase the exploitation and value extraction of their existing user base as much as possible (aka enshittification).

      • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        their SEC paperwork states that adblockers are a risk to their profits.

        Concluding implicitly: “… and therefore a threat to all your computers’ security” :-)

      • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s more obvious than that even; their SEC paperwork states that adblockers are a risk to their profits.

        Sounds like the single best reason to use one.

      • dalekcaan
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Dear God, won’t anyone think of the shareholders?

    • ButtDrugs
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Just for clarity, they already switched protocols (Manifest v3), they just have continued to support the old format (v2) that allows unlock origin to work. They are discontinuing support for v2 next year.

    • flappy
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      What really pisses me off is that mv3 is becoming a standard that Vivaldi, Firefox, Opera, Edge, etc. will use.