focusforte

Yes! This is exactly the kind of thing I'd rather see too. More directly financing the creators you enjoy.

YouTube subscription does have traction... And like I said, every streaming service has an ad free option. Some of them have an ad supported cheaper option, but they all have some option that allows you to consume the content without ads. It seems like you're kind of just talking out of your ass.

There's an economics of everything at play here, broadcast television had ads, cable TV at first didn't but it was also significantly more expensive. Cable TV wanted to lower prices to attract more customers, and in order to do that they started receiving more money from advertisers to make up the difference. Not all of the cable TV channels did this. However, even to this very day there are plenty of cable TV channels that don't have ads. They are considered the premium channels that you have to pay extra for.

The same thing is going to continue to be true on the internet as well, You will always have options to avoid ads by paying for the content that you want.

We're not talking about what holds power in a court, we're talking about functional reality.

What you can get away with on a technicality in court is irrelevant to whether or not it's piracy.

By a legal definition, no, ad blocking is probably not piracy. I'm no lawyer but I would wager that Piracy is probably more strictly defined than that. My point though is that it is functionally the exact same thing as piracy.

Ad supported content is distributed based on the advertising income paying for the distribution. If you are blocking that advertising in a way that prevents compensation to the content creator you are consuming that content without the creator getting paid the price that they set for the content.

The price was agreed upon in the same way that the price in the grocery store is agreed upon.

The content provider set the price, in this case, the price being consuming an advertisement.

To be totally clear, I absolutely advocate for piracy in some situations, I'm not going to get into the weeds and talk about the specifics when I do or do not advocate for it, but to extend upon the grocery store analogy, there are also some situations where I would absolutely advocate for someone to steal from the grocery store. And I'm not going to get into the weeds and talk about the specifics for when I do or do not advocate for that either. The point though is by calling ad blocking piracy I'm not making a moral judgment on whether or not it is right or wrong, I'm just pointing out that it is functionally the exact same thing.

People advertising shady things is not the same thing as a malicious ad, at least not in the context of the point I'm trying to make. By malicious ad I'm referring to those things that pretend to not be an ad at all, they pretend to be the download button or a notification of an unread message, or something along those lines.

I may not be using the terminology exactly right, but that's the kind of thing I'm referring to. And YouTube does. A YouTube does a perfectly fine job at being transparent when something is an advertisement and when it's organic content. They're not maliciously being deceptive at what is an ad and what isn't.

Wikiverse

YouTube is not doing it, I use YT premium and I never get a single ad. Ever.

And I know that ad supported cheaper versions of a lot of streaming services are becoming more common, but, to my knowledge, all of them have an ad free option. It may be more expensive than their cheapest tier, but they do have an ad free option.

If you want to see the internet less dependent on ads, the only way to do that is to be willing to pay for it yourself. Because streaming video content online is actually extremely expensive to do. And someone has to pay for it. If you as the consumer aren't paying for it then someone has to pay for it on your behalf. They're only going to do that if they can get something out of the deal.

Going with the flow is such an important skill that more parents need to put more of a focus in teaching. It's all about making sure that your response is a realistic way of attaining your goal in the situation.

If I'm talking to someone else and trying to help them through a situation like they say, ask them to think for a minute if getting angry will do anything at all to help the situation they find themselves in.

"You are absolutely right to be upset about this situation, and if you need to take a minute to feel that rage, go right ahead. Once you're ready though, let's take a deep breath, remember that we can't change what's already happened and instead be strategic and intentional about what we do from here to correct for what just happened"

Being able to gain control of yourself is a skill that requires practice. Intrusive thoughts and feelings and emotions happen to everyone, the trick is just recognizing when it's happening. When you recognize that it's happening, take a deep breath and shake it off. For me that means just slowing down and being much more methodical and intentional about anything that I say or do until that fight or flight mode response disengages. Be conscious of the fact that my reflexes cannot be trusted when I am in fight or flight mode.

I've got a memory from pre-k where I was basically refusing to participate in nap time and got kicked out of class and ultimately kicked out of Pre-K entirely. I don't remember a lot of the details but I do remember not wanting to take a and then getting kicked out to go to the toddler daycare room something like that

I mean, there are other civilized pleasant methods for companies to make profit. For users to pay.

That's why lots of places now have an ad-free subscription option. If you really want to smash out ads, pay for the ad-free subscription service.

No, they have a point. In hindsight, I definitely can see how the unskipable ads of cable TV resulted in a greater deal of patience. I'd be interested to see a more academic study of it, but anecdotally I definitely can see it.

I don't use ad blockers on YouTube because the creators that I watch on YouTube are people who I actually care about. I watch content on YouTube from real people who I want to be able to profit off of me watching their video. Ad blockers are effectively piracy, your taking the content without the agreed upon price, in this case, the price of the content is the ads.

And I don't make that comparison to convince anyone that they shouldn't use an ad blocker, I just think the decision of where to use ad blockers should be made with the understanding that you are pirating any content that you consume while using an ad blocker. Are you willing to pirate something from some random mega corporation? I am. Are willing to pirate content from this niche 3D printing YouTube content creator that you enjoy? I'm not.

As a default, I do use an ad blocker, but I will disable the ad blocker for any website that I can trust enough to not have malicious ads, especially websites that i want to financially support. Because for me all it means is sacrificing a little bit of bandwidth to load the ad that I'm just going to ignore anyway.