Nintendo taking youtubers profit. (Also Youtubes contentid)

[Neo Arcad]

I don't watch ads. So I couldn't care less. When adblock fails, then you'll hear me complaining.

[Multifarity]

In the "worst economic recession in history" we should still be looking at people in untrained labour as "morons", yes. Good ideas. Good attitudes.

Most people dear.
I worked in a furnisher store for 3 years... And yes, unfortunately people very much still do in my experience.

[San]

I'm fine with this. They made the game, after all, and I assume they're only taking a cut of the revenue, not all of it.

nah, it was all of it they were taking

[Condunum]

I don't watch ads. So I couldn't care less. When adblock fails, then you'll hear me complaining.

Honestly, I'm waiting for adblock to be removed from Chrome. I use it, but far too many people abuse the extension.

[Multifarity]

I don't watch ads. So I couldn't care less. When adblock fails, then you'll hear me complaining.

Why complain only in that case? They had ads on before, the only thing that has changed is who gets the money, it doesn't effect you unless you make the vids.

[San]

I don't watch ads. So I couldn't care less. When adblock fails, then you'll hear me complaining.

Honestly, I'm waiting for adblock to be removed from Chrome. I use it, but far too many people abuse the extension.

last month (i think?) i heard the adblock dev/s were working with totalbiscuit to add a feature to disable adblock for specific youtube channels

that might help

[Condunum]

Honestly, I'm waiting for adblock to be removed from Chrome. I use it, but far too many people abuse the extension.

last month (i think?) i heard the adblock dev/s were working with totalbiscuit to add a feature to disable adblock for specific youtube channels

that might help

Good. From what I know a few sites might put it into their TOS that advertisement blocking features are forbidden. I know some video hosting sites remove access to videos until you turn the adblock off for the page. Good idea on their part, because adblock really eats into the revenue of some sites.

[The Truth and Light]

last month (i think?) i heard the adblock dev/s were working with totalbiscuit to add a feature to disable adblock for specific youtube channels

that might help

Good. From what I know a few sites might put it into their TOS that advertisement blocking features are forbidden. I know some video hosting sites remove access to videos until you turn the adblock off for the page. Good idea on their part, because adblock really eats into the revenue of some sites.

What the hell am I reading?

[Rainbows and Rivers]

last month (i think?) i heard the adblock dev/s were working with totalbiscuit to add a feature to disable adblock for specific youtube channels

that might help

Great. So I'll have to have two ad-blocking extensions installed once someone immediately comes out with an extension to block that hole.

[Condunum]

Good. From what I know a few sites might put it into their TOS that advertisement blocking features are forbidden. I know some video hosting sites remove access to videos until you turn the adblock off for the page. Good idea on their part, because adblock really eats into the revenue of some sites.

What the hell am I reading?

Reason?

[The Truth and Light]

What the hell am I reading?

Reason?

If a feature of ad-block is that ads get blocked, blocking ads is not an "abuse" of services. That's just nonsense.

[Condunum]

Reason?

If a feature of ad-block is that ads get blocked, blocking ads is not an "abuse" of services. That's just nonsense.

Is it really that difficult to know what I was saying?

[The Truth and Light]

If a feature of ad-block is that ads get blocked, blocking ads is not an "abuse" of services. That's just nonsense.

Is it really that difficult to know what I was saying?

I don't owe sites revenue when they actively provide me the means to avoid paying, and encourage me to use them.

[Rainbows and Rivers]

Is it really that difficult to know what I was saying?

No, but your position itself is fairly ridiculous.

AdBlock exists to block ads. That's what it's for. Using it to block an ad - even if it's by a site which relies on ad revenue to stay up - isn't abuse.

[Condunum]

Is it really that difficult to know what I was saying?

I don't owe sites revenue when they actively provide me the means to avoid paying, and encourage me to use them.

"they" don't provide you the means to avoid paying, nor do they encourage you to use them.

[Condunum]

Is it really that difficult to know what I was saying?

No, but your position itself is fairly ridiculous.

AdBlock exists to block ads. That's what it's for. Using it to block an ad - even if it's by a site which relies on ad revenue to stay up - isn't abuse.

So that it exists to block ads makes my point ridiculous? I think the fact that many sites are taking measures to combat adblock would suggest my point isn't ridiculous. And since when is saying "too much of a universal service" worthy of ridicule?

[Avenio]

last month (i think?) i heard the adblock dev/s were working with totalbiscuit to add a feature to disable adblock for specific youtube channels

that might help

Great. So I'll have to have two ad-blocking extensions installed once someone immediately comes out with an extension to block that hole.

Rejoice, for the great virulent spawning pool that is the Internet has a solution.

Good. From what I know a few sites might put it into their TOS that advertisement blocking features are forbidden. I know some video hosting sites remove access to videos until you turn the adblock off for the page. Good idea on their part, because adblock really eats into the revenue of some sites.

If the ubiquity of adblocking programs means that websites don't go down the path of turning into the vidscreen from Idiocracy, I think lost revenue is a reasonable price to pay.

After all, if ads weren't annoying, most people wouldn't bother blocking them. The fact that these programs are overtaking the fact that ~80% of all users of the Internet keep their browser settings at default and are growing at 43% per year means that website designers and advertisers need to take notice, not close the barn door after the horse has fled.

[Nightkill the Emperor]

Seems fine.

[Condunum]

Great. So I'll have to have two ad-blocking extensions installed once someone immediately comes out with an extension to block that hole.

Rejoice, for the great virulent spawning pool that is the Internet has a solution.

Good. From what I know a few sites might put it into their TOS that advertisement blocking features are forbidden. I know some video hosting sites remove access to videos until you turn the adblock off for the page. Good idea on their part, because adblock really eats into the revenue of some sites.

If the ubiquity of adblocking programs means that websites don't go down the path of turning into the vidscreen from Idiocracy, I think lost revenue is a reasonable price to pay.

After all, if ads weren't annoying, most people wouldn't bother blocking them. The fact that these programs are overtaking the fact that ~80% of all users of the Internet keep their browser settings at default and are growing at 43% per year means that website designers and advertisers need to take notice, not close the barn door after the horse has fled.

I never said they were a bad thing, just that using them to such a heavy extent is bad. They have plenty of purpose and I never said they didn't.

[Avenio]

I never said they were a bad thing, just that using them to such a heavy extent is bad. They have plenty of purpose and I never said they didn't.

What does 'to a heavy extent' mean? Are too many people using them? Is it because people are using the default settings on Adblock or whatever and blocking all of the ads on every site they visit? Be more specific.

[Nazi Flower Power]

I don't see a big problem here. Nintendo gets to uphold their copyrights, the people who made the videos don't get in trouble, and anyone who is interested in the videos can still watch them.

[Rainbows and Rivers]

I never said they were a bad thing, just that using them to such a heavy extent is bad. They have plenty of purpose and I never said they didn't.

Really, now? What purpose is that? Is it to only block the ads you personally don't like?

[Condunum]

I never said they were a bad thing, just that using them to such a heavy extent is bad. They have plenty of purpose and I never said they didn't.

What does 'to a heavy extent' mean? Are too many people using them? Is it because people are using the default settings on Adblock or whatever and blocking all of the ads on every site they visit? Be more specific.

You should have asked for that in the first place.

For example, ads are the primary source of revenue for YouTube partners. I don't exactly know the formula, but number of ads on screen for x amount of seconds for y number of users = z cash. The more adblock is used, the less revenue is generated and the less a YouTube partner receives, contrary to the view counter. YouTube doesn't use too many ads. A promotion on the top, one before a video (not always) and one to the side. It's not much. Adblock was made primarily to combat the obsessive use of noise ads and the endless ads on some sites, but ends up being used everywhere for user convenience.

Now, what I mean by what I'd said is that, while Adblock has a good purpose and although it does point out the issue of there being too many ads, it's not that many major sites that use a lot of ads. They're doing the right thing by limiting or blocking the use of Adblock and other extensions on their sites, because they aren't the flagrant offenders.

[Rainbows and Rivers]

They're doing the right thing by limiting or blocking the use of Adblock and other extensions on their sites, because they aren't the flagrant offenders.

No site is going to tell me what extensions I can and can't use.

[Condunum]

They're doing the right thing by limiting or blocking the use of Adblock and other extensions on their sites, because they aren't the flagrant offenders.

No site is going to tell me what extensions I can and can't use.

They can and will. If you don't like it, you don't get to use their site. Because, y'know... It's theirs?