YouTube Ads
-
I pay for YouTube Premium with no ads. I use YouTube for financial research on my investments, so It's worth it for me to pay so I can shorten the time spent researching every night. But the trigger was the last election cycle in 2022 when I got bombarded with political ads that infuriated me, the same ads running over and over. That's when I clicked on the free trial and never looked back.
If it ain't broke don't fix it Discover my world at jkirkerx.com
Interesting, thank you
Paul Sanders. If I had more time, I would have written a shorter letter - Blaise Pascal. Some of my best work is in the undo buffer.
-
Quote:
Just pay for it, FFS.
Uh huh. That's exactly the attitude that people had when cable TV started to become popular. You can get this better product if you pay for it! Look at where we are now. Free TV is dead, cable TV has more advertisements than free tv ever did. No one won. Now it's Youtube's turn. You can get this "better" youtube if you pay for it! No ads, I double pinky-promise swear. And when it's all said and done, free youtube will be gone, and paid youtube will be just as shitty as free youtube is now with respect to ads.
Well, so far so good, what can I say. If it ever goes the way you're saying it might, I shall simply unsubscribe.
Paul Sanders. If I had more time, I would have written a shorter letter - Blaise Pascal. Some of my best work is in the undo buffer.
-
In the old paper newspaper days, I regularly threw the ad inserts into the wastepaper bin without looking at them. That was sabotage, too. I didn't feel sorry for being a saboteur. Also, when a friend laid down his newspaper, I often asked if I could read it. Not buying my own copy was stealing. Public libraries are for stealing, too. At the London tube, you see a lot of newspapers left on the seats - so many that I made a remark about it to a London friend of mine. He told that if you bring a newspaper to read on the tube on your way to work (or home), it is a matter of politeness to leave the paper on the train for others to read. That is sort of stealing, too, even if the second and third person reading the same copy may be one who never would consider buying his own copy.
Religious freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make five.
Interesting view. At least for books (printed) in the US it is well established that lending a book to another is fair use. It is similar to lending someone a screw driver. Same issue arose when places started renting movies on tape/dvd. In the US that was settled by requiring that stores purchase it at a much higher price. Depending on what period of time one looks at newspapers (printed) they vary making money from actually buying the paper, to ramping up on advertising revenue and then now, at least in the US for most major papers, trying to squeeze every penny out of diminishing readership. Certainly for much of that time reading it in a library was not considered a problem that I ever heard about. The ads that were not in the inserts were still there. I have read newspapers in a library - I cannot recall ever seeing inserts. Microfiche newspapers also contained the ads. But one could suppose the sale price no longer applied.