• @smeg@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4314 days ago

    TL;DW: the ads will be in the video stream itself which will mess up timestamps, sponsor block uses timestamps to know when the ads are.

    Seems to me that this will also break every other use case of specific times like direct linking to a timestamp of a video, right?

    • @Alice@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      2914 days ago

      This sucks for so many. People use timestamps for content warnings or to help viewers avoid spoilers. Commenters use timestamps when talking about the content of the video. It’s insane to change this once it’s so ingrained in how people use the website.

      • @gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1713 days ago

        It’s also how content creators literally create chapters: put the time codes into the video description

        That’s a native feature of the platform

      • @smeg@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1214 days ago

        Hopefully they’ll realise it’s a bigger breaking change than they wanted as part of this testing phase

          • @smeg@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            413 days ago

            Yeah I do. They still want to be able to sell their premium subscriptions and not every engineer working on the product is some soulless corpo. If they can break all adblockers without damaging their product they will, but if it fucks things up too much then they’ll go back to the drawing board and try something else.

    • Ænima
      link
      fedilink
      1914 days ago

      I’d imagine YouTube subtracts the ad length from posted timestamps when clicking a link containing one. But we are taking about Google, soooooo…

        • Ænima
          link
          fedilink
          814 days ago

          In the cat and mouse game, the cat can adjust tactics but the mice eventually figure out an alternative route. I’m sure they will find a way with this. Either that or a lot of people will just stop watching YouTube, I’d imagine.

          • @ahornsirup@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            1114 days ago

            A truly shocking number of people don’t use any form of adblock. I doubt that driving off the adblock users will have a significant effect on viewership (and even if it does, why would Google care, it’s not like we’re making them money).

            • @null@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              413 days ago

              There’s also plenty of people that do use adblock today, and would just put up with ads if it stopped working.

              So the actual number of people that would simply stop using YouTube altogether is lower than the number of people that use adblock today.

              And from YouTube’s perspective, those people aren’t contributing revenue anyways, and all they get is a little bit of usage data. Easy trade.

        • Unless a random number of ads are injected into the video that changes every time it’s viewed… Which is how they already work aside from being directly part of the video stream.

    • prole
      link
      fedilink
      English
      9
      edit-2
      13 days ago

      It will end up being like FreeVee on Prime for anyone who’s ever watched a movie or anything on there. They straight up randomly just inject ads in at random times, often not even during scene breaks. Characters are sometimes mid-sentence… Oh, and we’re back to the volume of the ads being 2x louder than the movie itself because I guess that law Congress passed way back in the day only applied to cable and broadcast TV.

      It makes it nearly unwatchable. So get ready for that experience.