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.

  • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    98
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    And I am fucking loving it. With this move, Google has effectively started an arms race between the team they have implementing this Adblock-blocking crap and the vast majority of the technically competent internet users in the world.

    Unless the rules of how the internet works fundamentally change, Google is not going to win.

    • Alex@feddit.ro
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      59
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why do you think they were pushing so hard for WEI? They did try to fundamentally change how the internet works.

    • affiliate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      i wouldn’t be surprised if this was partly a war between the team they have implementing this and the team they have implementing this, in their spare time

    • r3df0x ✡️✝☪️@7.62x54r.ru
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m not that optimistic. They could implement some sort of aggressive DRM. In the US, all they have to do is label protection as DRM and then it becomes illegal to even have any discussion of how to circumvent it. The overwhelming majority of users aren’t going to bother with any ad blocking. In the end, this could end up hurting Google if people build decentralized Youtube alternatives and then they could take viewers away from Youtube.

      • Adalast@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        They would end up shooting themselves in the foot. They are on shaky ground already and it would only take a new platform that can entice a few of their top content producers over to lose enough chunks of their revenues to hurt. And all they have do is keep fucking around to find out what a tech-literate group of nerds who hate big corps can do when they are aligned in a certain direction.

        • r3df0x ✡️✝☪️@7.62x54r.ru
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          They can get the rest of Big Tech and the MSM to start smearing the platform as “far right extremist” and spreading “fringe conspiracy theories.”

          • Adalast@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah, that is easy enough to build into the algorithm. Deprioritizing that sort of nonsense effectively would mitigate it gaining a foothold. The only reason why the current platforms don’t (in fact they prioritize it in many cases) is because discord is being equated with engagement and they see that as good for business. If you aren’t worried about business, then you can set up your priority algorithm to be more rational and egalitarian.

      • Dizzy Devil Ducky@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well, in the US you can legally talk about it so long as you do not actually do it. It’s similar to how an actor is able to talk about commiting murder without getting in trouble.

        • TauZero@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          By some argument, section 103 of the DMCA (which is what grandparent post is referring to) does make it illegal to even talk about DRM circumvention methods.

          illegal to: (2) “manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in” a device, service or component which is primarily intended to circumvent “a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work,” and which either has limited commercially significant other uses or is marketed for the anti-circumvention purpose.

          If youtube implements an “access control measure” by splicing the ads with the video and disabling the fast-forward button during the ad, and you go on a forum and say “Oh yeah, you can write a script that detects the parts that are ads because the button is disabled, and force-fast-forwards through those”, some lawyer would argue that you have offered to the public a method to circumvent an access control measure, and therefore your speech is illegal. If you actually write the greasemonkey script and post it online, that would definitely be illegal.

          This is abhorrent to the types among us for whom “code IS free speech”, but this scenario is not just a hypothetical. DMCA has been controversial for a long time. Digg collapsed in part because of the user revolt over the admins deleting any post containing the leaked AACS decryption key, which is just a 32-digit number. Yet “speaking” the number alone, aloud, on an online platform (and nothing else!) was enough for MPAA to send cease and desist letters to Digg under DMCA, and Digg folded.

          • Dizzy Devil Ducky@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Thanks for the heads-up. Definitely hope that if something like splicing ads in that some country like Russia or any other country that doesn’t care about US law or US copyright law would be able to write, host, and update methods to get around it on a server they control.