• Lemmyng@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 days ago

    Who the fuck pays for YouTube Premium? Literally NewPipe/Tubular/PipePipe and all other FOSS apps with free Premium features exists.

    • corvi@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      18 days ago

      Not on my TV, unfortunately :(

      I’ve tried pihole and pfblocker and several forms of Adblock plus casting, and eventually decided it was worth the $. I’m not proud of it, but YouTube premium is my only paid streaming service.

      • CubitOom@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        18 days ago

        Smart TVs are dumb.

        Get the oldest cheapest pc you can find (you may already have one in storage) and slap Linux on it and you’ll have a better experience.

        • corvi@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          18 days ago

          I’m running a Linux server, a Linux desktop, and a VPS host. While I’m far from an expert, I’d like to think I’m in a better position than most people when it comes to this type of solution.

          Even then, it just isn’t scalable. First off, I want to just use my remote and have things work. I need it to work not just for me, but for family across several devices. At the end of the day, the $15 a month is probably cheaper than I’d pay just for the electricity of another server, much less the time and effort spent administrating it.

          If someone with a lot more knowledge than me could build an ansible deployment that packaged a streaming tool compatible with plug-in casting devices, I’d be on that in a heartbeat.

          • CubitOom@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            18 days ago

            What I mean is that if you take a Linux installed pc with an app like freetube installed and connect it to your tv withan HDMI cable or similar. And use that for YouTube instead of the YouTube app installed in your smart tv, you will have a much better time.

            No need to overcomplicate it

            • blitzen@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              18 days ago

              Keyboard and mouse control and a random laptop hooked up with HDMI for a living room or bedroom TV isn’t high on the wife approval scale.

      • warm@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        18 days ago

        SmartTube? If you dont have an android tv, you can buy an android tv box/stick.

      • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        18 days ago

        I literally keep an Android TV box around for this reason. My smart TV is aging anyway and doesn’t have a Jellyfin app either - unless I compile it myself and then install it.

  • gjoel@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    18 days ago

    Yes…? YouTube wants to get paid. Companies pay YouTube to play ads. You pay YouTube not to play ads. If you do that, then the companies obviously won’t be paying for that. So either you pay or the advertisers pay. Mind blown!

    • otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      18 days ago

      It’s the taking of money for both and only doing one that’s the issue, friend. Breathe.

      • whatsisface@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        18 days ago

        Do they not get paid by advertisers per view? Wouldn’t they only ever get paid for either premium or ads for a user, never both?

        • otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          18 days ago

          Ad views aren’t sold individually, though views’re certainly involved as a metric. These fucks will take all the money they can, every time, and for as long as they can get away with it.

          Your “never” there is endearingly naive, no offense, and I do hope that you’re not at all surprised the next time you read/hear about any/every tech giant emphatically shitting on everyone & everything for profit, but getting <1% TR fines when (not “if”) they get caught and taken to court. 🥲🙇🏼‍♂️

          • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            18 days ago

            Ad impressions absolutely are tracked. You pay per impression or click IIRC (per 1000 impressions, really - they’re pretty cheap).

            Advertisers on YouTube include some huge companies. They’d tear Alphabet a new anus if they were being short changed on their impressions and found out.

            • otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              18 days ago

              Yes, and I didn’t argue that specific point, but you missed the content in the hurry to downvote, friend. I’m not sure what inside connect you have, or skin in the game, but I’m not keen on fishing about in constipated arguments w/ anons, thanks. Have fun!

              • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                18 days ago

                Unlike you, I haven’t downvoted you.

                Not even this comment, that was also someone else:

                You’re saying advertisers are paying for ads even if they’re not being shown to people. I’m going to have to disagree with that because literally if that came out, it would kick off Adpocalypse 2.0. A company like Apple, Disney or Amazon (some of the biggest ad spenders on YouTube apparently) will have slightly more power in court than you or me. Those are the customers that would be fucked over, not the viewers.

      • jonsnothere@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        18 days ago

        But they’re only getting paid by advertisers for actual ad views, so premium users don’t make them any money from advertising.

        • otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          18 days ago

          And, you’re assuming that YT isn’t clever enough to cover all the bases? They’re taking money from every side they can think of, and they know damn well that openly talking about ad-blocking inherently risks introducing the concept to new consumers, much less normalizing the whole concept.

          YT is clearly juuust fine with money from pretty much anywhere, and I certainly have no delusions that any “premium” service is only temporarily off-limits from that greed. Not just YT’s, either. Netflix & Amazon’ve already done exactly that and completely gotten away with it —to the mildest of whines from the consumer base. 🙄🤮🤷🏽‍♂️

          It’s all smoke & mirrors, and we each have a choice to believe their bullshit or not. You like steak or clarity?

  • fun_times@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    18 days ago

    This is similar to the old Italian mercenary system. Get paid by one side to siege a city, then get paid by the other side to end the siege.

  • Gobbel2000@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    17 days ago

    Which makes total sense given that video hosting is insanely expensive, especially at the scale at which YT is operating. I forget the exact number, but I heard that over half of the global internet bandwidth is used for video streaming from just a handful of websites.

    That said though, I still choose Ublock Origin.

    • jtrek@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      16 days ago

      They chose to go into this business. If they can’t do the job in a way customers like while making a profit and paying fair amounts for labor, fuck em don’t do the business.

    • jnod4@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      17 days ago

      What if half of our ISP bill went to subsidy websites based solely on how many megabytes/GBs you’re using towards or from a certain source.

      • Gobbel2000@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        17 days ago

        I get the idea, but it seems hardly reasonable to pay companies for the bandwidth they use. Wouldn’t that incentivize wasting bandwidth?

        • jnod4@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          17 days ago

          I can foresee a news website sending me gigabyte websites just to cheat the system. This is the part where the system breaks down

  • magnue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 days ago

    Don’t forget that even if we do that we still have sponsored segments from the creators themselves. God forbid we go a single day without a product being shoved down our throat.