Thread

1. semiquaver · 1789988297 · focus · HN ↗

   Did anyone actually read the linked wiki in full? It’s basically saying “if there are embedded ads in certain live (likely sports) content we carry you may see them even on an ad-free plan because we don’t have an alternative. Also we might try to promote different tiers of Disney+ itself within the app so to the extent you see that as an ad, that’s an exception to ‘ad-free’”

   I’m all for consumer awareness but I’m begging everyone to stop freaking out over prosaic non-issues like this.

   1. DonsDiscountGas · 1789992621 · focus · HN ↗

      > Also we might try to promote different tiers of Disney+ itself within the app so to the extent you see that as an ad, that’s an exception to ‘ad-free’”

      Yes I see that as an ad. Do you not? Does anyone not? And if I'm on the highest paying ad free plan, what are they promoting to me?

      1. Gareth321 · 1789993627 · focus · HN ↗

         I strongly agree, and it frustrates me when people and companies claim that advertising their own products "doesn't count." I cancelled my YouTube Premium plan because of ads. These are all the ads they permit on Premium, despite advertising everywhere that Premium removes all ads:

         * Ads in YouTube feeds for other google products and services.

         * Ads underneath videos for products from the channel owner.

         * Sponsorships within videos from the channel owner.

         * Advertising overlays (supported IN THE APP BY GOOGLE) for products and services from the channel owner.

         * Email advertisements for Google products and services.

         * Community post advertisements from channel owners which show up in the YouTube feed.

         I contacted support to enquire and they state these are not considered advertising.

         1. sbarre · 1789996098 · focus · HN ↗

            I mean, the stuff that's in the video is not really under Google's control.

            Are you suggesting that the burden should be on channel owners to upload variations of their videos that don't include sponsor blocks? That's a bit onerous. My commercial agreement is with YouTube, not with the video creator.

            If you don't like ads from creators, don't watch those channels?

            YT Premium does provide the "skip ahead" functionality that almost always jumps over sponsor blocks.

            I will say I've been a YT Premium subscriber for years and I've never seen any ads for other Google services in my feed, and I don't get advert emails either.

            1. cwillu · 1789996330 · focus · HN ↗

               If google can't provide an ad-free product, they shouldn't be selling an ad-free product.
            2. Gareth321 · 1789996898 · focus · HN ↗

               > I mean, the stuff that's in the video is not really under Google's control.

               It is completely within Google's control. They have a hundred pages of terms of services, dictating everything the content creators may and may not do and say, down to individual words, symbols, and opinions. If Google wanted to, they could tell content creators to stop adding sponsorships. I understand you'd make less money.

               > If you don't like ads from creators, don't watch those channels?

               I stopped paying YouTube and I use SponsorBlock now. You're not entitled to my time or attention or money.

               The problem is ultimately that Google advertises an ad free experience, which it's not. I'd be willing to pay for an ad free experience.

               1. sbarre · 1790013063 · focus · HN ↗

                  > You're not entitled to my time or attention or money.

                  Ahhh but you're entitled to someone else's hard work in producing the content you watch, and god forbid they'd be entitled to compensation for that work.. Got it..

                  Rules for me, not for thee..

                  1. Gareth321 · 1790062372 · focus · HN ↗

                     You're free to put your content behind a paywall. YouTube makes this very easy.
            3. thesuitonym · 1789999012 · focus · HN ↗

               All creators that are on Nebula already upload sponsor-free versions there.

               1. whatevaa · 1790003245 · focus · HN ↗

                  Nebula is mostly irrelevant. Even Nebulas creators wouldn't survive without youtube revenue.

                  1. thesuitonym · 1790006104 · focus · HN ↗

                     Maybe so, the point is there is a non-zero number of creators who already do sbarre thinks is too onerous.
            4. notpushkin · 1790017578 · focus · HN ↗

               > Are you suggesting that the burden should be on channel owners to upload variations of their videos that don't include sponsor blocks?

               No, just mark the sponsored segments, so YouTube can skip over (like SponsorBlock does). And they already pay more per view from Premium users vs ad-supported ones, so it just makes sense to skip ads in the video as well.

               That being said, I think paying creators directly is more sustainable in the long term.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.