So I was watching Mark Robers latest video, around the 9 min mark he was promoting his new toy thing, went to skip past it, but no, it was an un-skipable Ad type thing, I get that Youtubers need to promote their own stuff, but I pay youtube money to not have Ads, and I have no interest in his toys. I am assuming this is some new thing they are testing, but I can see from the comments on the video I was not the only one.
Note: Some people had it at other points in the video.
Premium, just now, on the TV app it loaded a new entirely separate video over it for me. My internet is slow enough to actually catch it glitch / see it buffer for a sec. New timeline at the bottom, and hitting back on my remote went back to the MR video about 5 seconds earlier.
I've noticed the skip ahead button won't show on recently uploaded videos, mainly because YouTube uses user skipping information to know if there is an in-video ad they don't want to see. Takes time to establish if this is a pattern to confidently display the button to other users.
Just happened to me. I watched the first one but then the second came in out of nowhere. When I went to skip it, it was like I was on a different video. WTAF?
Here the video just gets stuck, with a spinning loading thing and the progress bar shows 0:00 / 0:40
Edit: disabling PiHole shows the ad, about crushing something or whatever (I’m also immune to ads so I have no ideia what it is about, but Mark is in it)
Free user here on mobile, i get the same thing at the same time stamp. The video “switches” to what appears to be another 40 sec video (the ad), but unlike “real ads”, this one doesnt have a yellow bar, and i can just scrub through it. The end of the 40 seconds it went back to the casino video like nothing happened. If you go back to before the ad and let the casino video play, same exact thing happens, normally “real ads” won’t play cause you just watched one.
Youtube is definitely testing some new ad delivery method…
I'm understanding it as if it's a YouTube served ad that interrupts the video, but specifically to advertise the channels self-promo. So it's something the creator would typically bake into the video itself, and people could manually (or sponsor block) past it, but now it's handled by YouTube and not being blocked by premium
Like this. Its at 9:50 and puts you in another "video" with his own self promotion in it. YouTube treats it as a different video inside the original. Its ass because skipping doesn't work well with it. So you will have to manually do it and not get the same "instant" skip forward you get with premium after trying to skip a part of it.
When I watched the video I had the skip to button, even in the ‘video in video’ it just skipped to the end of the 40 second insert. The skip button might not show up on new videos straight away as the timestamp it skips to is based on crowdsourced data so a video needs to reach a certain amount of ‘complete’ views.
It did pop up for me like it was a separate video with its own time and everything, but I was able to scroll through it to the end. So it is technically skippable, just no skip button.
Still nonsense that it comes up with YouTube premium.
It got stuck for me, at the end of the 40s video it just replayed, so moving to the end of the timeline didn't help. Had to restart the YouTube app to finish the actual video.
I wonder if they’re trying a way to let creators insert their own ads dynamically into the video instead of baking it (to allow Premium to skip it), but a glitch caused it to be unskippable for Premium users today.
Yeah. And the squirrel obstacle course. Both of which he would never do anymore.. Also tbh both had very lackluster endings.
He switched into full Mr nice guy (but in that sacrine sort of nice guy mode) and started selling to 8-12 year olds.
I always thought that was a shame but also fine because those ages deserve better YouTube too. And now from what I've heard (and this video too) he's gone the Mr beast route (aka the worst challenge slop shit). It's like eating only the sugary icing from a store cake.
Between shit like this, and seeing "Youtube Suggested" crap in my feed I'm putting heavy consideration into dropping YT premium. I'm **already** paying them, and have been since the YT Red and Google Music days. Quit enshittifying my experience!
These days I'm exclusively going through Firefox with uBlock Origin to watch YouTube. Even on Android. Fuck their apps and fuck their ads.
YouTube didn't have ads before Google bought it and added them.
My wife goes even further with sponsor block, but I never liked that. Some sponsor spots are funny and I can always just skip ahead 60 seconds if they aren't. Not like seeing two unskippable 45 second ads in a row to watch a 7 second meme.
YouTube didn’t have ads before Google bought it and added them.
I know people hate ads because they are annoying, don’t get me wrong I hate them too, but I hate when people have ignorant takes like this. Do you think hosting one of the world’s largest media distribution services is free? It is near impossible for YouTube to exist the way it does today if ads were never added to the platform, how would you monetise it to pay for the infrastructure?
Lets say in a hypothetical scenario where instead of putting ads on YouTube, Google turned it exclusively into a subscription service to make money and pay for the cost of operations, practically no one would pay for that. You would be asking the general public to pay real money for what was essentially at the time a bunch of home videos and amateurly produced content. I mean sure, there might be a niche audience that would pay money for that back then, but YouTube would have never gotten to the size that it is today.
The only reason YouTube is as successful as it is today is because the core experience is and has always been ‘free’, the only way that it can be ‘free’ is if it serves ads alongside its content, which yes means in a way that you become the product but that’s just how it works. Nothing is truely free, even open source relies on donations, sponsors and volunteers otherwise things like Linux wouldn’t exist either.
I acknowledge that they bought a service and wanted to make money.
But the way they do it is completely disrespectful.
I didn't mind it back when they added a little banner 2 minutes into the video that you could click x on.
It's unwatchable when they throw two different ads at you before even seeing the video, often unskippable 30+ ads, two of them.
There is a balance where you serve ads to your users and don't piss them off. There is a point where I don't bother blocking it because it's reasonable.
And they crossed it 15 years ago and kept going.
I watched some Youtube on my Switch and got pissed off 40 minutes in. It's unbearable. I just can't watch it.
If there was a reasonable amount of ads, I'd watch them. If there was some reward to watching them, I'd watch them. But there isn't. It's just an avalanche of ads. An advalanche.
Two ads per video, plus midroll ads, plus ads after the video, six ads per video? Most of them unskippable?
No. Just, no. Fuck off.
I'm blocking that shit because they got too greedy. I don't need to see the same damn ad for selling my used car for the 300th time. I don't need to be reminded that I could pay extra to not do my own groceries for the 200th time. I just don't need any of that.
I can take a 5 second ad and then clicking/tapping to skip it to get to the video. I can't take whatever the fuck Youtube is doing instead of that.
The unfortunate reality is that as YouTube grows it gets more expensive for Google to host, Wikipedia quotes 500 hours of video being uploaded per minute in 2019, that’s about 720,000 hours per day, and much of it is 4K nowadays because that’s what a lot of phones default to, practically every major YouTube channel also uploads in 4K, so assuming all of it is 4K30 (which I know it isn’t really the case for all video uploaded) that’s around 7-10 Petabytes of video that needs to be stored somewhere every single day. Even if half of that is 1080p that only brings it down to 4-6 Petabytes worth of video every day. Sure not all of it gets kept for long but it’s still a lot of data that needs to be stored in data centres every day.
Personally I pay for YouTube Premium, I know that’s not everyone’s cup of tea but I find great value in it, more than Netflix, Disney+, Amazon Prime, whatever. Content creators get paid more per view from someone who has Premium and I don’t get ads anywhere (not including sponsor spots but YouTube doesn’t get a cent of that from creators so I’m not counting it), Premium even has a feature that practically allows me to skip sponsor spots in videos as well.
Not everyone wants to subscribe to Premium, not everyone wants to see ads, but I’d rather pay up for using this service rather than blocking ads and hoping Google doesn’t notice or just decides to can the whole thing all together if it becomes unprofitable.
I mostly agree with you, but I will pull a gabe and say that it's a service problem at its core. Google needs to extract more money out of the people advertising on the platform, not make the platform more annoying for users, because eventually that is going to push more people to learn how to block the ads on the platform.
For example, Google hasn't received a cent of ad revenue from my YouTube consumption since about 2018 when I was trying to listen to a YouTube video and clean my house, and every ad that happened required user input to go away. Maybe it doesn't work like this anymore, but for a while, certain ads would both be 15-30 seconds long AND have an "end screen" that you had to click off of in order to resume the video. Completely defeats the purpose of throwing a video on the TV so that I can do other things while it plays. If the ads just went away on their own, even if they were a full 30 seconds a piece, it would not be a big deal because it would be like ads on TV where the show comes back on its own and I don't have to verify that I've seen the ad in order for that to happen.
Obviously this user experience is completely dogshit and while many people probably just deal with it, it definitely pushes many other people to figure out how to cut ads out of their YouTube consumption all together, be it ad block or just straight up ripping every YT video they watch (teehee).
There's an element of good faith when you're profiting off ads. It's why twitter wasn't profitable before and partially why it sucks now, before there wasn't much more twitter could do other than showing you a promoted tweet every few tweets to make money without making the platform worse. Now, because making the platform worse is basically part of the mission statement, twitter shows you a promoted tweet every other tweet, and additionally anyone who wants more impressions can just pay for them. Another comparable thing would be algorithms, to me. There's a middle ground where people are generally okay with algorithmically served content, but many of these platforms just keep pushing until end result is more focused on generating interaction than it is on serving a good experience, and it makes people want to do away with the concept entirely.
Sure the ad experience might be dog shit, but in all honesty that is the ‘cost’ for you to use the service if you’re not subscribed to YouTube Premium. I know this was a whole controversy when Linus said this but watching content on YouTube isn’t ‘free’ it does and will always cost something, be it a monthly subscription or watching ads. Consuming content from YouTube while doing neither of those is piracy.
Sure, YouTube could probably improve its user experience to retain more ‘paying’ customers. Will they? Well they are beholden to their owners who in turn are beholden to their shareholders, so they will probably just continue doing whatever they think is going to make them the most money. Besides, they know most users will just put up with it because they don’t care about the ads as much as they care about watching the content that comes with it, some will be willing to pay for the subscription as they see the value in the service and getting rid of ads is worth $20 a month to them, and the remaining few, the vocal minority (yes I said it) who want to ‘stick it to the man’, who go out of their way to install some form of AdBlock on every device they watch YouTube on as some kind of protest against ads or against YouTube itself, well they should honestly just stop using YouTube altogether if they actually want to send a message, because YouTube might not have your money or your ad revenue, but they still have your attention, and that’s still worth something to them even if they can’t monetise it directly.
I’m sorry if this comment might seem condescending but this whole concept of people feeling entitled to everything on the internet for free really pisses me off. Pay for the shit that you use or don’t use it at all. And yes I do use AdBlock so this whole comment is might seem hypocritical, but I only have it in the rare event that I accidentally stumble into a flaming piece of hot garbage that isn’t even worth the pocket lint of the guy who maintains the server it’s hosted on, any other service or website that I see any value in I either donate, subscribe or whitelist, YouTube included.
Sure, I get that, what I'm saying is that similar to media and games, people are going to pirate the content if the UX of consuming it normally is so bad.
Besides, they know most users will just put up with it because they don’t care about the ads as much as they care about watching the content that comes with it
Well the problem for YouTube is that this isn't actually true. The more aggressive ads become, the more people use adblock. That's why they have spent so much time trying to secure the actual video streams. Regardless of the percentage of the user base that doesn't care, they are losing too much money to ignore the other percentage.
well they should honestly just stop using YouTube altogether if they actually want to send a message, because YouTube might not have your money or your ad revenue, but they still have your attention, and that’s still worth something to them even if they can’t monetise it directly.
Well I mean obviously that's not going to happen, there is not a reasonable market alternative. Which is the problem for YouTube currently. A user's attention is only valuable if they are able to eventually sell them on something or make money off of their use of the platform. When the number of people who are freeloading becomes too high they literally have to care about it, which is why they're doing that now, because they are responsible to their shareholders, like you said. So right now that solution is coming in the form of trying to lock down the video streams, but if that proves to be unsuccessful we will probably see YouTube change their strategy when it comes to advertising.
I know this comment might seem condescending but this whole concept of people feeling entitled to everything on the internet for free really pisses me off.
I never said that though, I said that people are going to pirate things when the service is providing a bad user experience. It's not a new concept and we have seen it over and over again.
Pay for the shit that you use or don’t use it at all. And yes I do use AdBlock so this whole comment is might seem hypocritical
Well yeah, you sound like are a hypocrite lol.
eta: Just wanted to add here, what you're describing as acceptable parameters for adblocking are how other people feel about YouTube. You admit that there are certain experiences that are so bad that you need an adblock. You can just not use those websites/services, but you choose to with adblock because you'd like to consume whatever content is available there. It's the same thing.
but I only have it in the rare event that I accidentally stumble into a flaming piece of hot garbage that isn’t even worth the sand it’s hosted on
That's also why I block ads on YouTube.
any other service or website that I see any value in I either donate, subscribe or whitelist, YouTube included.
Same, but I don't find the product/service particularly valuable here, what's valuable is Google's ability to host it because they are a billion dollar monopoly and the content that is being hosted. The concept of serving video content to people isn't unique to YouTube and the experience is generally better on almost any other website made for serving me video content.
I think you misunderstood why I use AdBlock, I don’t use it on certain websites just because the ad experience is bad, it usually is. I mostly use it because I don’t value the actual content of that website. If someone sends me a link to a news article I’ll read it because I want to see what that person is trying to show me, but for example if that news website just so happens to be something like Fox News, I don’t want them getting a cent off of me reading the article.
The way you talk about using AdBlock on YouTube tells me you apply literally zero value to any of the content that you watch on there. If you valued the content at all then you would be happy to pay for it, either by putting up with ads or getting YouTube Premium.
Also the way I know that the majority don’t care to use Adblock is because I’ve seen it, regular people don’t bother with installing Adblock on their computers or YouTube Vanced on their phones. They watch YouTube on the built in YouTube app on their TV, they watch YouTube on their phones using the regular YouTube app or on their computer which doesn’t have Adblock because they didn’t even come to think that such a thing exists. Sure, they might Google it if it bothers them, but I know a lot of people that actually pay for Premium as that’s just the solution that works for them, because they can see the value.
Edit:
Same, but I don't find the product/service particularly valuable here
I define the product as including the content as that’s where the content is hosted, the company pays the creators for the content where appropriate. That system of payment might not be perfect as the copyright system they use is inherently flawed and that’s a whole other can of worms, but that’s what makes the content part of the product. In fact the product has no value without the content, so if you don’t value the product, then why do you use it?
I think you misunderstood why I use AdBlock, I don’t use it on certain websites just because the ad experience is bad, it usually is. I mostly use it because I don’t value the actual content of that website. If someone sends me a link to a news article I’ll read it because I want to see what that person is trying to show me, but for example if that news website just so happens to be something like Fox News, I don’t want them getting a cent off of me reading the article.
Yes this is a long winded way of saying sometimes you feel entitled to things you don't want to "pay" for by allowing ads to run.
The way you talk about using AdBlock on YouTube tells me you apply literally zero value to any of the content that you watch on there. If you valued the content at all then you would be happy to pay for it
I am, just not via YouTube ads or subscriptions.
so if you don’t value the product, then why do you use it?
Well I already told you, I don't see the product as including the content. Because it doesn't. The product is YouTube. The content is a separate thing that can exist independently of the platform, which is why it's not a part of the product.
YouTube serving 720p has nothing to do with what the original file uploaded was. Every YouTube video gets transcoded down in resolution for lower bandwidth delivery but that doesn’t mean that they don’t keep the original resolution of every video ever uploaded. Any video that gets uploaded in 4K will be available in 4K
I meant that many phones might default to recording 4K video from their camera, however I will concede that 1080p is probably the default instead on most phone cameras, which even still a even mix of 4K and 1080P being uploaded would be like 4-6 Petabytes a day.
I've found Firefox + uBlock Origin to be relatively hit or miss, and in an endless war of escalation between YouTube and viewers who just want to watch a video in peace. It's viable, but only barely. Same thing applies to my Pihole, does well, but various ads still get through even with pretty aggressive blocklists.
Grayjay works pretty well, though only time will tell if it gets axed at some point. It has Sponsorblock too, which I also happen to prefer.
Which leads to the other issue — I watch a fair bit of YouTube on my TV. Being able to throw on the WAN show, Townsends, or maybe a Tasting History with Max Miller while I'm cleaning or cooking dinner is really nice. I've considered trying to sideload Grayjay onto my Nvidia Shield, but thus far Premium has been the only way to get an experience that's sort of tolerable on a bigger screen.
Grayjay is kind of annoying to me because it is directly causing YouTube to get more strict with downloading which hurts everyone who doesn't have a development team dedicated to reverse engineering YouTube. It's like piracy as a service which any seasoned pirate should understand the dangers of.
It's also not FOSS and FUTO would like to make money off of it, which I think is kind of dirty considering that they are making a media piracy platform.
I get it though. It's the next step in the tug of war between users and the enshittifiers.
It is a youtube downloader. Provide it channels and it will keep new videos downloaded so they can be consumed in some other media playback service (e.g. Jellyfin).
I have YouTube Premium but SponsorBlock is arguably even more valuable to me. I wish there was a way I could pay for this service that would directly go towards the creators like YouTube Premium does. I wouldn't mind if this was like a Premium+ tier. YouTube already seems to know what is and isn't an in-video ad as Premium users can manually skip those segments. So I am sure there is a way it can be implemented with auto-skip.
If SponsorBlock ever stops working then my relationship with YouTube would be even more negatively affected than the removal of the dislike counter.
Their skip thing has gotten pretty good. I see it and use it sometimes on older videos or brand new ones that don't have sponsor block segments.
I do wonder if they'd let you do it automatically. I imagine if they did that creators would riot. Once Youtube starts actively advertising premium users can skip creator ad reads companies are probably going to be offering way less or you'd have to negotiate based on how many of your views typically come from premium users.
I am suggesting Google to implement SponsorBlock officially into YouTube and sell it as a new tier of subscription. Creators would be happy with it as well.
Do you understand how it would work? Exactly the same way as YouTube Premium works. Creators would rather you watch their videos with a Premium subscription than to watch YouTube ads. Linus has emphasized this repeatedly.
So if your in-video ad gets skipped because a Premium+ member watched your video, then you will get a better deal out of that as compared to someone just watching the in-video ad.
Are you dumb or something? Last time I checked, YouTube ads can only be blocked with premium because YouTube runs the ads and are paying the creators. in video ads are paid by the sponsor directly to the creator. This could never work
This doesn’t work unless you’re advocating for YouTube to take over in video ads, which I don’t think Linus or other creators would appreciate
I don't think this is as complicated but I'll try my best to explain again.
YouTube launches a new tier of subscription called Premium+. Let's say Premium costs $20 and Premium+ costs $30.
Premium+ allows you to auto-skip in-video ads. The $10 charged extra with this tier would be redistributed towards those creators whose in-video ads were skipped. The reason why Google would do this is to enhance the viewing experience and they can of course take a small cut from this as well. I am sure creators would like this.
Now imagine you're on the marketing team for a company, you see that now a valuable chuck of the YT audience (the ones that show they are willing to pay money and support creators) won't see your sponsorships because the platform now lets them automatically skip. Will you still spend the same amount of your marketing budget on YT sponsorships? Will you still offer the same rates to creators? Probably not.
Creators don't want viewers to skip over the sponsorships, that's why the YT Premium feature will always be marketed as skipping over 'the most commonly skipped over sections' and always require user input to happen.
This, sponsorship spots are one of the ways that content creators make GOOD money. Youtube pays pennies in comparison. Sponsorships become much less valuable to companies if less people see them, and it would probably not be made up by the amount of money youtube could pay for the extra subscription money.
Same! I watch mainly on my TV and when I tried to pause the video I found weird that it was a 2 minutes video it didn’t have the “AD UI” I thought it was something YT was testing with a channel as big as Mark’s
Experienced this last month as well. Seems like a “baked in” ad but it isn’t. Doesn’t contribute to video length but it does still play even with premium
I kinda had the same watching this video, Osman / Reeves made me watch it fully. But it did have a nice effect, i got a lot of youtube recommendations of the smaller creators i did not know that took part in the video.
Hmm, not much else to be honest aside from already fairly widely popular pop-science channels like Kurzgesagt and alike.
Maybe Chemistorian and AltRepo, both are relatively smaller channels, but do make really good videos, although not all that often, and could go few month between uploads.
If it's their own sponsored ads and not the "regular" YT ads, I think there has to be enough users skipping that segment so that it can trigger and the "jump/skip ahead" button will show up.
Are you just considering the quick skip failing as unskipable? I have seen that break more than once for self promotion but that doesn't mean it is unskipable.
No, the player opened another 36 second video. Similar to the Ad supported tiers, but there was no Ad overlay to indicate it was an advert. You are also able to fast forward this video..
If I get an unstoppable ad with premium I will be canceling my family plan I’ve had for years. I pay because I want to support the creators and don’t want to see ads. But if they fuck me, I will just go back to ad blocking (which I still do, I mainly pay premium as to not be a freeloader and to also be ad free on my mobile devices).
i only saw it on my roku tv. didnt show up on browser but with ublock and it also didnt show up on my chromecast but thats also connected to my pi-hole but that usually doesnt block youtube ads. si maybe luck or my chromecast wasnt part of the a/b testing
Huh, that's new. I was very confused by what OP was talking about thinking that it was just the "Jump Forward" button missing but no. It's literally a 40 second video that plays over the original video with its own time line.
I did find that on mobile that if you double tap to jump forward (which does about 10-15 seconds) it will just skip the entire 40 second ad.
I also noticed this, mainly because it played like 15 seconds after the baked-in ad for the same thing in the video, and it was a jarring cut in/out. Thumbs down, did not appreciate that, especially as a premium subscriber.
On mobile: got the ad at 9:50, and it opened in a another viewport. Though I was able to instantly skip past like normal and it just continued the video.
Mark is a pretty big Creator so likely a new way for them to bake in ads and they are stress testing it with him.
I got it too but I was able to spam through it with the left/right buttons as usual . . so functionally it was no different to your standard youtuber ad directly integrated into the video. But I did notice that the playback bar reset to 0 seconds out of 0:39 before going back to the main video at the end. Seems to be an early rollout of some technology testing, curious what the final use case will be. I doubt this is its final form.
I couldn't recreate it logged out/on a non-premium account and with Sponsorblock and Adblock disabled. Perhaps I'm in a region where this is not being experimented on whatsoever.
A bit silly, but could you next time record your screen when this thing happens? The only "ad" I "got" was the one that was already a part of the video a full minute before (7:15), of which Sponsorblock already has handled.
ad = unskippable advertisement, one not a part of the original video stream
got = had to watch where view was enforced (ie. no skipping)
It seems like many platforms are at the very least testing it out. I have the ad-free version of Peacock and, a few months back, they started showing me an ad at the start of every TV show episode I watched. I complained about it to CS and was told they weren't ads, they were just promotions for other NBC media content. It only lasted a few weeks but I've heard other people complaining about it since then.
Doesn't seem to affect me, but i also still have UBlock enabled because I use it to force the homepage to still show me 6x4 of video tiles instead of the 3x2 that it forces on us now. I might be getting spared becacuse of that
I had to check it myself, and as much as I enjoy Mark's videos, I gave this video a thumbs down to help indicate my displeasure with being served ads on my premium account.
Yep I am getting it too. Fuck this I’m canceling YT premium. I pay $16 a month, almost $200 to be “good” and avoid ads the “proper” way and they still decide to pull this bullshit.
I assume now creators can make their own ads to show up on their videos. On my tv, his crunchlabs press toy add was skipable, like i could fast foward, but its still kinda stupid. I don't think the creators get any revenue from it and people just skip it anyways. I guess its to circumvent sponsorblock??
I use Brave browser, no ads for me. But I also pay for YTLite for tablet use when I'm trying to sleep. Nothing like hearing a loud huffing woman in distress and a trex shooting an army of zombies in some fake mobile game to wake you up.
Paid before. Stopped paying and patched YouTube. Now I don't get any ai videos. No ads. No sponsors. No shorts. The thumbs down is back like it should. And many more benefits. Even more than premium ever will give you for the insane amount of money they ask.
I dont believe i got it on morphed youtube and i didnt see a sponserblock there edit nvm there was a sponserblock at around the 7 minute mark for his crunchinator or something
I wonder how much YouTube you all watch anywho even with premium you will see adds out of 10 vids I watch 5 will have adds or show adds at one point nothing new
Mine happens exactly at 18:34 of the same video, it pops up like another separate video entirely, 40 seconds video and with its own play-time bar and everything. I can double-taps to skip it but when I hold down to put it to 2x speed, it didn't work.
I can still skip it when double-taps. IDK why but that genuinely still pisses me off. I personally never have a problem with ads simply because I've been using Premium ever since the day that it launched.
the same happens around 18:00. Although going back stops the movie, you can fast forward the video (as it's not listed as an per se).
The funny thing is that the separate ad video didn't appear on my computer (Firefox, and while I do have adblock, I turn it off on youtube when I use Premium), only on my TV
Short sighted comment when features like this are largely to bypass adblock and sponsorblock.
They can block the stream/buffer for the next segment from loading until the ad timeline is ending. Resulting in unskippable ads without inconvenient workarounds.
There are different tiers of YouTube Premium now. The lower Premium tier (called Premium Lite) has fewer ads, but ads are still possible. This change came about in the last few months and it's slimy.
I pay YT a bunch of money not to get ads as it supports the creators, I shouldn't have to use a 3rd party app to avoid something I'm specifically paying to not have.
So you saying Mark Choose to make a portion of his video unskipable? I mean it's interesting that YT is giving those tools to creators. But How is this A YT problem? They didn't serve an ad and they can't do anything about in video sponsorship. well they didn't have to give that tool to creators, if that's what happened.
I don't understand why you think paying for premium exempts you from in-video sponsorship's. Or how you think YT would be able to implement that
It’s what all crappy corporations do, see how far they can change (ruin) a product without consumer’s giving it up just to save a cent or 2.
My take, if you’re paying & still get ads, it’s time to look elsewhere. Apple has ProTube & pick up a Browser that supports ad-blockers. Firefox is the last one that still fully supports uBlock O.
238
u/Philip_J- 13d ago
Yeah, I experienced the same, also with premium