this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2024
619 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

59381 readers
2690 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
619
YouTube looks to be testing server-side ad injection to counter ad blockers (9to5google.com)
submitted 5 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
231 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
  • YouTube is testing server-side ad injection to counter ad blockers, integrating ads directly into videos to make them indistinguishable from the main content.
  • This new method complicates ad blocking, including tools like SponsorBlock, which now face challenges in accurately identifying and skipping sponsored segments.
  • The feature is currently in testing and not widely rolled out, with YouTube encouraging users to subscribe to YouTube Premium for an ad-free experience.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 16 points 5 months ago (2 children)

It's quite likely that the cost actually outweighs the gains. Adblocking really isn't all that prevalent across Internet users as a whole. I think the stats are something like 10% or lower.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

And yet Google is investing all this time and money into trying to block the blockers. It's really quite stupid.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Well, most of their efforts have been relatively low cost on their end. Stuff like manifest v3 isn't actually particularly expensive to do. Just requires you to have near total capture of the web browser market.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

Stuff like manifest v3 isn't actually particularly expensive to do.

Oh yes, a complete overhaul of the way their browser engine works is absolute child's play and doesn't cost a thing. 🙄😒

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

But it's always been their server. It's not like Geico provided that video snippet

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago

Yes, but server-side injection, if I understand it correctly, means you have to actually remux the videos into a single stream. That's additional processing load, which is basically their main cost of business.