Gregory's Server@corbin
I mean, yes it could be... but thats a very convoluted, some may say desperate clutching at straws of an excuse.
Why are you so intent to fight for googles good name in this thread?
@Purple @tay @dashdsrdash @grs @josephcox
|
Top-level
3 comments
 @doug @Purple @tay @dashdsrdash @grs @josephcox i’m not “fighting for google,” i’m annoyed because this entire discourse is ridiculous. it’s a bunch of people who have decided that 3 sec ads are the end of the world, and are looking for any excuse to justify it, and the latest one was claiming youtube was blocking firefox users. we now know that was false. if you don’t like ads, pay for premium. if you don’t like either of those things then eventually we get no youtube. that’s how this works.  @corbin @doug @Purple @tay @dashdsrdash @grs @josephcox You aren't fighting for Google, you're just repeating their talking points uncritically. Which, since this is the internet, amounts to the same thing. The tiny percentage of youtube's market using ublock to skip ads on YouTube aren't the problem and never were. They are the bulwark. The canary in the coal mine. When that population spikes, it's always because the content providers have changed the agreement for the worse. |
@doug @Purple @tay @dashdsrdash @grs @josephcox two reasons:
1. there needs to be good evidence for claims, redditors and a bunch of blogs covered a few reports and didn’t dig into it, 404 was the first one that actually pieced something together. at this point the people alleging a conspiracy just want to believe in it.
2. people should be paid for their labor, making youtube videos (and hosting them) is labor. the people who want to watch the video without ads or premium contribute nothing.