| General > General Technical Chat |
| YouTube runs experiment addressing users with ad blocker |
| << < (44/75) > >> |
| SiliconWizard:
--- Quote from: MK14 on October 20, 2023, 03:57:20 am ---I don't know what the solution is. Except perhaps VPN's or similar, for everyone. Except that I suspect that a huge majority of the population, don't know about all this data gathering, what its consequence are going to be, or how to prevent it. --- End quote --- You will be pleased to know that VPNs have actually gained a certain popularity (even if it's still only a minority of people using them), and that the governments of some countries are already considering banning VPNs for personal use. |
| magic:
--- Quote from: NiHaoMike on October 19, 2023, 02:04:08 am ---I wonder if it might be possible to send TCP ACKs early when it downloads the ads. Some packets can get dropped but you don't care about the content anyways. I suppose there would be the problem of getting too ahead of the server and the scheme getting detected, some adaptive scheme can counter that. --- End quote --- --- Quote from: NiHaoMike on October 19, 2023, 11:59:31 pm --- --- Quote from: SiliconWizard on October 19, 2023, 07:09:23 pm ---Yeah. It's not hard from the server's pov to ensure that *all data* has been sent to the client. Detecting only partial transfers is not rocket science. --- End quote --- The client is effectively lying that it has received a packet that got dropped. Of course, it would be easy to detect if it claimed to have received one that hasn't been sent yet. But so long as that doesn't happen, how would a server know that the client didn't actually receive all the packets that have already been sent? --- End quote --- Bollocks. By the time your browsers drops a packet, it has already been delivered to you and used up all the necessary network resources, so what's the point? You can't stop YT from sending you packets that you request and they could easily stop you from watching videos if you don't download enough ads. As for ACKing packets which were genuinely lost by the network, yeah, maybe you could, or maybe not if some cryptographic scheme in place renders the whole connection undecipherable afterwards and requests for videos and ads are multiplexed together. If it works, you would maybe reduce bandwidth by single digit percentage or whatever; complete waste of time. |
| Ranayna:
--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on October 20, 2023, 02:16:07 am ---Which makes me point out another issue with subscriptions: they require you to be connected to one account to watch videos. While I have a google account, I'm not always connected to it when watching YT, and I don't want to be forced to. --- End quote --- That is indeed a good point. And Youtube does not even have any kind of profiles. What i watch differs *heavily* while at work or while at home. At work, i either watch some product-tutorials (some of these are *excellent*) or have some ambient music running in the background. And i have a company advocated adblocker active. This blocker is active by default and is supposed to save bandwidth and reduce risks. I can disable it, but i am not supposed to. I am not logged in at work. My viewing habits at home are *very* different. While i do watch the occasional product tutorial, i mostly watch for entertainment and personal interests. Videos that, would they appear in my feed at work, would be frowned upon. Since YT does not have Profiles to keep these watching habits separate (as far as i am aware of), i would have to pay twice for Premium, which i obviously will not do. By the way: I actually do not hate the algorithm. Interestingly i do watch a couple of channels that are often complaining about being spurned by the algorithm, but i see each and every new video made by them on the start page. Even witht being subscribed to them. |
| MK14:
--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on October 20, 2023, 06:47:35 am ---You will be pleased to know that VPNs have actually gained a certain popularity (even if it's still only a minority of people using them), and that the governments of some countries are already considering banning VPNs for personal use. --- End quote --- I would assume that in the same way, Doctors are allowed access to drugs, via prescriptions (although, in general, they are NOT suppose to write prescriptions, for themselves!). Computer personnel (because of needing to test websites, using different IP addresses, to their connection, which could be the same IP as the servers), and other reasons. Presumably/probably would be exempted from such laws. Otherwise some genuine work, such as testing and developing websites, might get harder. As multiple IP addresses may be needed, to pretend to be different users, perhaps even in different countries. But anyway. I suspect, a significant percentage of the users on this forum, would know how to resolve a new law in their country, that bans VPNs, if they want to. If that ends up being needed, and if there are (legal) solutions. |
| magic:
In general, government is a problem with no legal solution ;) |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |