Firefox

17907 readers

26 users here now

A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

k_o_t@lemmy.ml

115

Oh no youtube (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago by EqMinMax@lemmy.world to c/firefox@lemmy.ml

34 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] s20@lemmy.ml 42 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Here's the thing, YouTube. When you first started running ads, I didn't really mind. They were short, there weren't that many, and if they were particularly annoying or repetitive, there was a skip button. I respected that you needed to make money and that you wanted to pay the content creators, and you respected my time.

But then you decided to flood the fucking platform and cut the revenue share with the creators. Without adblock, I can't watch a 5 minute video without 5 minutes of ads. You're trying to force me into paying for your premium service by annoying me to death.

Which I might do if I thought the people whose videos I actually like got a decent share of the revenue. But they don't. Hell, at least one of my favorite YouTubers is regularly demonetized, so they wouldn't see a penny.

So, YouTube, I'll keep blocking ads and use services like Patreon to support my favorite YouTube folks the best I can. And if you won't let me use adblock? Well, I guess I have to find some other way to occupy that hour or so a week I use your service, because I'm sure as shit not using half of it to watch ads that don't benefit the people whose videos I enjoy.

ETA: this post contains hyperbole (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hyperbole ).

[–] Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well achshuellly what you mean is hyberpolic. You see the two old men inside some random college discussing English had a fight and now it’s offensive to say hyperbole cause one of the guys died and the other won

[–] s20@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago

Err… no?

As far as I can tell, "hyperpolic" is a typo, and you meant "hyperbolic", which kinda fits, but it would be "contains a hyperbolic statement," rather than "contains hyperbole." It would be less clear, though, since "hyperbolic" can refer to either "hyperbole" or "hyperbola".

Meanwhile hyperbole refers only to a figure of speech and not potentially an open curve with two branches.

…

Sorry, did I ruin your joke? I ruined your joke didn't I. Man, I just can't stop myself from being a pedantic jackass…