• A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    90
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    13 days ago

    Funny, considering in the past he’s gone on big rants about how adblocking is no different from piracy, and is theft.

    But then again, its Linus we’re talking about, its not like he has a particularly big issue with theft anymore.

    • helenslunch@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      12 days ago

      I don’t understand why people are all pro-piracy but then get offended when someone accuses them of piracy…

      He never went on any “big rants”. He’s mentioned it a few times, and he’s right. You’re bypassing payment (in the form of watching ads) to watch the video. LTT doesn’t really care because AdSense only makes up a small portion of their income, which is why he’s shown many different times, many different ways to block/bypass advertising. I could make an argument about how he’s “pulling up the ladder behind him” but I digress.

      Regardless “piracy” is a fairly convoluted term with no concrete definition and it’s a dumb argument for anyone to have.

      • GaMEChld@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        12 days ago

        This is correct, he both explained how ad blocking hurts creators, and how ultimately he doesn’t mind because purchasing merch is way more beneficial to them then the adsense money.

        All he was saying is do what you want to do but don’t pretend your actions don’t impact other people. Do it with open eyes if you’re going to do it.

        • AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          12 days ago

          To be clear, blocking ads isn’t directly denying anyone money. YouTube decides how video creators are paid and they choose to not pay if ads are blocked. You can agree or disagree with that decision, but the user has no role in it.

          Personally I think it’s shitty that YouTube can just refuse to pay for the content people create for them.

            • Unchanged3656@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              12 days ago

              I did not agree to anything. When I open the site they just start serving videos to me (even autoplay is activated by default). If they don’t want me to watch their videos without ads they should stop serving them to me (ie, put them behind a paywall)

            • tabular@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              12 days ago

              Ownership implies a device should be controlled by the user. I don’t just mean not playing adverts but how about not recording my voice (or other data) to send it to Google servers for them to keep and exploit? You’re free to believe in this implied agreement but I doubt that’s in your best interests.

          • helenslunch@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            12 days ago

            YouTube decides how video creators are paid and they choose to not pay if ads are blocked.

            So…this is YouTube’s fault because they chose not to be a charity? LOL that’s some gold-winning mental gymnastics right there.

      • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        12 days ago

        You’re bypassing payment (in the form of watching ads)

        By this argument going to the bathroom during a commercial break is piracy.

        This isnt “someone being offended when accused of piracy”

        This is " People getting upset when an idiot tries to blame end users, instead of holding the people who created the problem accountable"

        Cause adblock isnt a user problem.

        Its an ad service problem. They created a hostile environment where people had to run adblockers to protect themselves against unmoderated and unpoliced content and malicious/infected advertising.

        If you have issues, blame the people who caused it, not the end users trying to protect themselves.

        • tb_@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          12 days ago

          This is " People getting upset when an idiot tries to blame end users, instead of holding the people who created the problem accountable"

          Did Linus blame anyone though?
          No. He simply stated a fact.

        • helenslunch@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          12 days ago

          By this argument going to the bathroom during a commercial break is piracy.

          Only you didn’t go to the bathroom. The ad just never appeared.

          Chances of you getting up and leaving the room every time an ad comes on: 10%.

          Chances of you blocking an ad with an ad-blocker: 100%.

          This isnt “someone being offended when accused of piracy”

          I think it very clearly is.

          This is " People getting upset when an idiot tries to blame end users, instead of holding the people who created the problem accountable"

          Whether it is piracy or not has nothing to do with blame or responsibility. You’re still just taking personal offense to being called a pirate and conjuring up nonsense arguments to combat it.

      • berengal@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        12 days ago

        Yeah, him calling it piracy or not doesn’t matter, it’s just a stupid semantic argument that doesn’t matter at all to his overall point. And while I think it’s a stupid take of him, it’s also the reason people are still bringing up his opinion on the matter, so good job of him spreading his message I guess?

      • futatorius@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        12 days ago

        If they want payment, they can require registration, agreement to payment and authentication. Nothing’s stopping them. If they put something on the open web and try to monetize it, nobody owes them a living. If I put a display in a shop window, and include wording that says that looking at the display means you’re obligated to also hear a sales pitch, everyone will rightly tell me to fuck off.

        Choosing not to load potential spyware, malware and bloatware while looking at free content is no more piracy than is crossing the street while shopping to avoid a tout.

        • helenslunch@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 days ago

          Choosing not to load potential spyware, malware and bloatware while looking at free content is no more piracy

          It is not free content. You’re just spreading disinformation. Just like the movies you download when pirating are not free content. The payment is watching ads. You’re utilizing software to forego that payment (just like piracy).

    • baseless_discourse@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      12 days ago

      I think he mentioned that ad-blocking is priacy, but I don’t recall he said piracy is theft or piracy is inheritly unethical.

      He mentioned many time that he pirates stuff, except he would pay for them first.

    • Kbobabob@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      12 days ago

      Do you have a source? I’ve watched his videos for awhile but I don’t remember hearing this take from him.

      • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        12 days ago

        It was in the streams with Luke. I dont remember the exact ones, I’m sorry. I can say that the last time I saw it was years ago, though, but thats because I stopped watching his content years ago.

        edit

        actually found a clip embedded in another site, i’m shocked.

        https://youtu.be/a-PH2GUy_zM

      • majestictechie@lemmy.fosshost.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        12 days ago

        It was on an episode of the WAN show a while back (I don’t know which, I stopped watching a while ago). He said if you’re not paying for the service or watching the Ads, it’s the same as Piracy because your not paying what’s owed.

        • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          12 days ago

          Which is incorrect, because Google itself went like 15 years without showing any ads at all to like 5% of their users.

        • futatorius@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          12 days ago

          If some hawker comes up to me and pushes a bunch of flowers in my face while I’m out walking, I’m not obligated to pay for smelling them. And if they’re sufficiently aggressive, they’re committing assault.

      • hanabatake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        12 days ago

        He talks about it in this video (the video this thread is about)

      • SendMeHappyThings@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        12 days ago

        I watched this video before it was taken down. At the start of the YouTube section he says something along the lines of “I think ad block is theft, but you’re going to do it, so I have a responsibility to make sure you do it safely.”

        • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          12 days ago

          My ass he cares if you do it safely.

          He’s just trying to pull views from the current controversy. Which I have no problem with, thats what youtubers do. They try to ride every wave and pull viewers from it.

          I just take issue with the smug hypocrisy he exhibits while doing it.

    • Rolivers@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      12 days ago

      It’s a little bit more nuanced than that. Yes you’re denying ad revenue but it’s not a bad thing.

      • futatorius@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        12 days ago

        They are being paid by third parties to shove something in your face that you didn’t come to see in the first place. They’re not entitled to earn a cent from that, regardless of what bait they choose to place in the trap.

        Who elected them and who consented to this manipulative, intrusive arrangement?