this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2023
786 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

59414 readers
4014 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Inside the 'arms race' between YouTube and ad blockers / Against all odds, open source hackers keep outfoxing one of the wealthiest companies.::YouTube's dramatic content gatekeeping decisions of late have a long history behind them, and there's an equally long history of these defenses being bypassed.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] clara@feddit.uk 81 points 11 months ago (3 children)

the "open source hackers" are always going to win this one, for a simple reason. if the data of the youtube video is handed to a user at any point, then the information it contains can be scrubbed and cleaned of ads. no exceptions.

if google somehow solves all ad-blocking techniques within browser, then new plugins will be developed on the operating system side to put a black square of pixels and selectively mute audio over the advert each time. if they solve that too? then people will hack the display signal going out at the graphics card level so that it is cleaned before it hits the monitor. if they beat that using some stupid encryption trick? well, then people will develop usb plugin tools that physically plug into the monitors at the display end, that artificially add the black boxes and audio mutes at the monitor display side.

if they beat that? someone, someone will jerry rig a literal black square of paper on some servos and wires, and physical audio switch to do the same thing, an actual, physical advert blocker. i'm sure once someone works that out, a mass produced version would be quite popular as a monitor attachment (in a timeline that gets so fucked that we would need this).

if that doesn't work? like, google starts coding malware to seek and destroy physical adblockers? then close your eyes and mute your headphones for 30 seconds, lol. the only way google is solving that one is with hitsquads and armed drones to make viewers RESUME VIEWING

as long as a youtube video is available to access without restriction, then google cannot dictate how the consumer experiences that video. google cannot win this.

[–] badbytes@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It's how we did it with MythTV and over the air or cable tv. The algorithms will just save a file in post, that has the ads removed. And that was 15yrs ago.

[–] viperex@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

I don't see how we escape ads if YouTube splits the video in two and ads play on a third of the screen alongside the video. Or in a chiron

[–] UlrikHD@programming.dev 10 points 11 months ago (2 children)

And if Google went nuclear and starts embedding the ad into the videos themselves?

[–] clara@feddit.uk 42 points 11 months ago (1 children)

the current solution for that would be similar to the current "sponsor block" plugins, here's an example

crowdsourced start and endpoints for embedded sponsorships

something like this tool, but for future embedded google adverts

[–] tiller@programming.dev 9 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

Without talking about the resources it would require, youtube could totally only serve the ad until it has been "watched". And no amount of sponsor block or similar software would help. These software only work because youtube allow you to navigate the video. If they decide that you have to fully download a 30s ad video, and that you can't ask for the video for the first 30s, then you wouldn't be able to do anything (or at the very max, just hide the ad and wait 30s on a blank screen).

[–] affiliate@lemmy.world 36 points 11 months ago (2 children)

then you wouldn't be able to do anything (or at the very max, just hide the ad and wait 30s on a blank screen

i would choose the blank screen over watching an ad, every single time

[–] oatscoop@midwest.social 12 points 11 months ago

Or the adblock could buffer the video and play it on a delay ad free. People will be fine with doing something else for a minute.

Better yet, have it done in the background -- particularly for new videos on channels you're subscribed to.

[–] r3df0x@7.62x54r.ru 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

People could do that out of protest, and upload videos as proof of them doing it. Advertisers would start pulling out if they think they're being ripped off like that.

Eventually at some point, the nuclear option would be if the government decided that sending back false information saying an ad had been viewed is computer fraud.

[–] daltotron@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

I don't think the relative amount of people that would do that would be high enough to really end up mattering, and it's not like, in that circumstance, advertisers can tell whether or not people are actually watching their ads anyways, which has always been the most dubious part of ads. And, is the biggest advantage of the internet and youtube, is that you can tell, you're allowed access to those metrics. I don't see a reality where youtube just goes to basically like, shittier cable advertising, forcing everyone to watch all the ads all the time, and that becomes somehow attractive to advertisers. I think, if that were the case, advertisers would probably pull out just on that basis and go where they know exactly what content they're putting their ads in front of, which has always been the disadvantage of youtube.

[–] AceSLS@ani.social 9 points 11 months ago

Even if they did that it's not impossible to find some exploits. No software is free of bugs which can be exploited, especially networked ones which are often finicky because they have many systems in place to pretend flawless execution. Just look at the TCP protocol, it's dropping packets left and right but users usually don't notice because they get spammed till one gets through

[–] Corgana@startrek.website 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

How do those extensions that skip download countdown timers work then?

[–] laurelraven@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Those are usually handled by JavaScript being run on the client side, I think, so it just speeds that up

[–] Corgana@startrek.website 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Sure but my point was if there's a practical way to do what the guy above me was proposing, then I would assume those sketchy ass sites would employ the same tactics. Not a programmer though.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 1 points 11 months ago

All other hope forlorn, there's still ML to recognize and cut out ads.

Or one can download the same video with as many as possible metrics different, so that ads would be different, and then compare the two videos. Ugh.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

This type of war happened 15 years ago with Hulu vs Xbox. Hulu won because despite there always being an exploit it was always several days before a work around was uploaded. Eventually it was Hulu on xbmc for 1 day, then 3 days no Hulu on and on until everyone gave up.