There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

scholar ,

It’s bizarre how blatent this is. Google has so much power over web standards that Mozilla have to work really hard to make firefox work, but YouTube don’t bother being subtle or clever and just write ‘if Firefox, get stuffed’ in plain text for everyone to see.

ares35 ,
@ares35@kbin.social avatar

this isn't much different than when microsoft added code specifically to break windows 3.1 when run under dr-dos instead of their own ms-dos. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARD_code

Lmaydev ,

And it cost them 280 million in the 90s ouch

tetris11 ,
@tetris11@lemmy.ml avatar

Something tells me they survived.

aseriesoftubes ,

Google has been doing this kind of thing for a while. If you try to use Google Meet in Firefox, you can’t use things like background blurring. Spoofing Chrome works in that situation as well.

Lemminary ,

And the stupid thing is that all I use Chrome for is Meets… And that’s it. Do they really think they win me over?

chiliedogg ,

Not you or me. But most people, yeah.

sulsaz ,

That is, as always, the problem: it works for them. The average Joe isn’t going to implement a new filter into ublock…

FontMasterFlex ,

How does one “spoof” chrome?

dual_sport_dork ,
@dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world avatar

You can change your user agent string, the text your browser uses to tell the web site you’re looking at what browser it is, either via your F12 developer tools menu or via an extension.

scholar ,

The most convenient way is with a browser extension that changes your user agent. You can also change it in the developer options of most browsers.

AlexWIWA ,

It works for me now. Only took them 8 years

agent_flounder ,
@agent_flounder@lemmy.world avatar

In my other comment I provide a link to the US DOJ anti-trust complaint center website.

the_blackwell_ninja ,
@the_blackwell_ninja@mastodon.online avatar

@scholar @db0 Buy enough of the competition and pay off enough government regulators and as a company you get to do pretty much do whatever you want.

cheese_greater ,

Where is this location in the pic?

rentar42 ,

It doesn't exist.

cheese_greater ,

Is there any place thats roughly analagous or…it must be inspired by something?

Breath of the Wild? Lol

Annoyed_Crabby ,

Crab island.

cheese_greater ,

Is that a thing?

Carnelian ,

It’s from the Crab Rave music video.

Noisestorm, the artist who made Crab Rave, is also working on a game currently called Crab Champions. It’s in early access on steam, super fun

cheese_greater ,

Is there an actual tangent between this pic and that video/song/work?

Carnelian ,

So, this is not a picture of a place. It is a computer generated graphic of an island which was made for the music video.

The reason you’re seeing it now is simply because the person demonstrating the load time discrepancy chose to use this video in particular. The video was most likely chosen arbitrarily and due to it being popular (270m views and counting)

0x0 ,

It’s often used by the channels of Linus Media Ground for audio demonstrations of the hardware they showcase.

Annoyed_Crabby ,

Like other said, no lol i’m just pulling your leg

But there’s Christmas Island where the crab is protected, and every mating season they will travel toward the sea to spread their egg and they swarm like ant. Interesting creature, look up some video you’ll love it.

Tetra ,
@Tetra@kbin.social avatar

I've noticed that too, I just switch to Freetube when it happens.
Simply disgusting, but it's business as usual for Google.

rchive ,

I just use Freetube either way. I can’t stand autoplaying videos or suggestions, popups, etc.

JJROKCZ ,

Is free tube just pulling YouTube’s data or it a separate site? Can you watch livestreams if it’s the former? Basically all I use YouTube for is watching a couple streamers and watching Japanese udon restaurant channels while I eat my bologna sandwich for lunch

Tetra ,
@Tetra@kbin.social avatar

It does play livestreams, yes.

JJROKCZ ,

I’ve gonna look into that then thank you

NegativeLookBehind ,
@NegativeLookBehind@kbin.social avatar

Did this dude really just link a Reddit post?

coffeebiscuit ,

In this case you could be neutral about the source.

themachine ,

Nah, Reddit source. Wait 5 seconds.

Nougat ,

Wow, and it's literally just "If you're using Firefox, wait five seconds."

baked_tea ,

Elon moment

Voltage ,

The fuck?? Isn’t this anti competitive behaviour?

PerogiBoi ,
@PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca avatar

In a previous generation, governments would go after this blatant anti competitive behaviour.

ObviouslyNotBanana ,
@ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world avatar

I’m sure the EU will still.

PerogiBoi ,
@PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca avatar

It’s just a shame that there’s really only one government organization globally that will still stand up to corporations.

Damage ,

For now

psycho_driver ,

To be fair China will send you to a reeducation camp or disappear you if you try to act like a western billionaire.

Sheeple ,
@Sheeple@lemmy.world avatar

China will make you disappear for many things including speaking up against the genocide of religious minorities ¯_(ツ)_/¯

dojan ,
@dojan@lemmy.world avatar

Honestly with the speed new BS crops up I don’t think they will.

rchive ,

The current US Federal Trade Commission is quite agressive compared to other FTCs historically.

Metatronz ,

True. Though they have been stuck with 30 years of damage simply reverse too.

tetris11 ,
@tetris11@lemmy.ml avatar

Think of it as 30 years of rent they’re now claiming.

Zoboomafoo ,
@Zoboomafoo@lemmy.world avatar

Yes, but they haven’t fixed this specific problem that just broke in the last day or so, therefore the FTC is a corrupt useless organization that pours hot wax on kittens

4lan ,

then why do we have like 4 conglomerates making everything in the grocery store?

s1nistr4 ,

If you’re networked with the right people in the US, laws don’t matter

vxx ,

Do you want to hear about the Microsoft “bug” that affected Firefox that was only recently fixed after 5+ years of getting reported?

Corporations really hate non-profit products that are superior.

rchive ,

Is it more anti competitive than McDonald’s only selling McDonald’s burgers or preventing you from bringing Taco Bell tacos in from outside?

grue ,
  1. Yes. Yes, it is!
  2. McDonald’s doesn’t actually give a shit if you bring in food from other places.
Techmaster ,

McDonald’s probably does care, but their minimum wage employees don’t.

rchive ,
  1. How?
  2. Pick a different example then. In my experience movie theaters don’t let you bring food in from outside. McDonald’s still won’t sell a Burger King burger regardless of whether you could bring one in.
agent_flounder ,
@agent_flounder@lemmy.world avatar

🙄 No it would be like Ford owning gas stations and pumping faster for Ford vehicles than Chevy.

Zak ,
@Zak@lemmy.world avatar

Doesn’t Tesla do the equivalent of that with charging stations?

dubyakay ,

Maybe. But Tesla doesn’t own over 50% of the charging station market share.

agent_flounder ,
@agent_flounder@lemmy.world avatar

True… I think even if they don’t, it’s still potentially anti-competitive.

(Gawd, Imagine how life would be with gas station incompatibility with your car. Holy shit that would suck).

ubermeisters ,
@ubermeisters@lemmy.world avatar

Tesla, you mean the one that literally made and freely distributed the open standard that almost all vehicle chargers are based on? And may have a better understanding of the technology as a result and able to charge faster accordingly? That same Tesla? What a wild notion!!

rchive ,

That’s less restrictive than what I said. McDonald’s won’t let you bring tacos in at all, doesn’t just make you wait at the door for 2 minutes, etc.

Edit: and to anyone quibbling with my McDonald’s example saying you can in fact bring tacos in, that was just an illustration. I can find plenty of examples of one establishment not letting people bring food in from somewhere else.

agent_flounder ,
@agent_flounder@lemmy.world avatar

I don’t feel your analogy quite captures what is going on here because both McDonald’s and Taco Bell are in the same business. Maybe if you explain it more.

Google owns a major web destination, YouTube, essentially a line of business in its own right, in addition to Chrome, also its own distinct product. Firefox competes with Chrome but Google is allegedly using market dominance with YouTube to make it harder for Firefox to compete.

If a company owns two products A and B and if A is used to access B, company cannot hinder competitors to A via fuckery in B.

This is the kind of thing that MS got in trouble for – using Windows to tip the scales in favor of Internet Explorer by tightly integrating it into the OS.

McDonald’s prohibiting people from using their restaurant, which is not itself a separate product with a separate market. Nobody is clamoring to go to McDonald’s restaurant spaces to sit and eat. It’s just part of the restaurant offering. So there is no leverage like there is with YouTube being used against a competitor for a totally different product. And besides, Taco Bell can do the same as McDonald’s. They’re on equal footing.

If in your analogy there were some other product that McDonald’s owned that could penalize you for going to Taco Bell your analogy would work.

  • Google – Ford
  • Mozilla – Chevy
  • Firefox – Chevy car
  • Chrome – Ford Car
  • YouTube – Ford gas station
rchive ,

Thanks for your question.

I see food preparation and dining rooms as separate industries, even if they don’t appear that way at first. The most we can see this in practice is probably mall food courts. Web content like YouTube is the food and the web browser is the place or mechanism by which we consume “food”.

Is being allowed to take tacos into McDonald’s a hill I’m going to die on? No, of course not, it’s just the first illustration I thought of. Lol. I could probably come up with a better example, that one was just easier and more visual.

To be clear, I’m not saying there’s no anticompetitiveness happening, I’m saying that all vertical integration is basically this same amount of anticompetitiveness, and vertical integration is often very good, which is why we tolerate it all the time.

I agree the comparison to MS and Internet Explorer is somewhat similar. I also think that case was not decided particularly well, and it’s not as revealing as it could have been since it ended up settling out of court, and IE ended up getting crushed by Chrome just a few years later.

I wonder, if Google made a new app called YouTube that could only watch YouTube and made it the only app that could watch YouTube, sort of like Quibi, would that be more competitive or less competitive? No one is asserting that Quibi was anticompetitive at all, correct? That would be even worse for Firefox users, they’d completely lose access to YouTube unless they downloaded a 2nd app, this time YouTube instead of Chrome, but like Quibi it would seem to dodge all these competition concerns completely. I think that shows how these concerns can be selective and kind of nonsensical.

qfjp ,

Is it more anti competitive than McDonald’s only selling McDonald’s burgers

Yeah, it’s more like the next time you go to Wendy’s, McDonald’s will follow you and try to lock the doors before you go in.

rchive ,

No, not really. Google can’t do anything about my taking my Firefox browser and watching videos from somewhere else. There are countless other video streaming services.

agent_flounder ,
@agent_flounder@lemmy.world avatar

Yes except everyone knows YouTube has a massive, massive market advantage in that space. And the channel you want to watch isn’t on the others. And you know this too.

qfjp ,

There are countless other video streaming services.

There are government websites - including my state’s dmv - that exclusively use youtube. You’re being disingenuous when you’re saying you can just use another streaming service (and I don’t believe you don’t know it).

rchive ,

The efficient solution to that problem is governments using a different platform that’s actually neutral. The government has full control over where they host their videos. Using that as a reason to TRY (a likely long and drawn out process) to force Google to change its policies company-wide is silly.

I’m not being disingenuous. I watch videos on a bunch of platforms. It’s easy.

qfjp ,

The efficient solution to that problem is governments using a different platform that’s actually neutral.

First time I’ve heard public services called efficient, but ok.

I’m not being disingenuous. I watch videos on a bunch of platforms. It’s easy.

We’re not talking about you here. You’re purposely ignoring the problem, and therefore being disingenuous.

rchive ,

Public services aren’t efficient, but they can surely change themselves more efficiently than they can force a multi billion dollar company to change its ways.

I’m surprised you’re not more worried about the government outsourcing its functions to a company you seem very suspicious of.

If the government decided to have vital public meetings only in a private venue you have to be a member of or something, the proper fix is not to force the club to accept everyone, it’s to have the government stop having vital meetings in private places.

I also don’t see a problem because everything of value these video streaming services offer is replaceable by one of the many other streaming services. The fact that YouTube is the biggest or most recognized does not change anything for me. The fact that there is some content that is only on YouTube doesn’t, either. That’s a normal thing that happens in an economy. Ford dealers only sell Ford cars, Coca Cola doesn’t sell Pepsi, etc.

qfjp ,

Public services aren’t efficient, but they can surely change themselves more efficiently than they can force a multi billion dollar company to change its ways.

[citation needed]

I’m surprised you’re not more worried about the government outsourcing its functions to a company you seem very suspicious of.

You’re the one talking about all the alternate video services you use. I just dont want a monopoly.

If the government decided to have vital public meetings only in a private venue you have to be a member of or something, the proper fix is not to force the club to accept everyone, it’s to have the government stop having vital meetings in private places.

wut. Not having meetings in private places literally is making sure the ‘place’ accepts everyone. Do you even read what you’re saying?

I also don’t see a problem because everything of value these video streaming services offer is replaceable by one of the many other streaming services. The fact that YouTube is the biggest or most recognized does not change anything for me. The fact that there is some content that is only on YouTube doesn’t, either.

Well, you totally missed the point then.

rchive ,

I just dont want a monopoly.

There is no monopoly in video streaming. Not even close.

wut. Not having meetings in private places literally is making sure the ‘place’ accepts everyone. Do you even read what you’re saying?

You’re misreading what I wrote. If government unfairly has vital meetings at Private Club which not everyone has access to, the solution is not to force Private Club to accept everyone, it’s to not have meetings at Private Club and have them at City Hall or something instead, somewhere that isn’t exclusive.

qfjp ,

There is no monopoly in video streaming. Not even close.

Ah, you’re one of those people. Okay.

IHadTwoCows ,

Is this a “gosh Wally, they’re just trying to do business! Do you expect everything for free??” post? Because that’s not how internet business works. This is not a thing that Google invented and developed on their own.

rchive ,

Because that’s not how internet business works.

How does it work, then?

This is not a thing that Google invented and developed on their own.

I don’t know what this is referring to or what it has to do with anything.

ubermeisters ,
@ubermeisters@lemmy.world avatar

How to spot a Ms employee

micka190 ,

Some people are reporting it happens when your accounts get flagged by YouTube for blocking ads and that using a private browsing session can be used to bypass it, so it’s possible this isn’t a blanket thing?

Either way, they can go fuck themselves.

If you’re on Firefox and using uBlock Origin (which you should), you can add the following to your filters list to essentially disable the delay:


<span style="color:#323232;">! Bypass 5 seconds delay added by YouTube
</span><span style="color:#323232;">www.youtube.com##+js(nano-stb, resolve(1), 5000, 0.001)
</span>

It doesn’t fully disable it, just makes it almost instant, because Google has been doing shit like looking at what gets blocked to combat ad blockers recently.

Sheeple ,
@Sheeple@lemmy.world avatar

Thanks I’ll get back to this later

moody ,

I use youtube without logging in, and it runs normally. If I use a private window, that’s when I get a delay when loading videos.

ubermeisters ,
@ubermeisters@lemmy.world avatar

Good God I would hate to see the Mr Beast hell that your front page must be

moody ,

Once you start watching videos, you still get recommendations based on your viewing even if not logged in. As long as I don’t clear my cookies, I basically get the content I’m interested in.

ubermeisters ,
@ubermeisters@lemmy.world avatar

I always forget other people still allow cookies etc, I’m over here like an internet hermit, using Libre browser

moody ,

I block all third-party cookies, but I do want some basic functionality out of the internet.

agent_flounder ,
@agent_flounder@lemmy.world avatar

Yes. The US DOJ has a website for reporting antitrust concerns

TheBat ,
@TheBat@lemmy.world avatar

Yes.

https://media.tenor.com/_QMRtYkD1mYAAAAd/the-sopranos-tony-soprano.gif

RoyaltyInTraining ,
@RoyaltyInTraining@lemmy.world avatar

Yes. It is. And consumers can’t do a thing about it.

VampyreOfNazareth ,

Anti trust that evil Google

Jaysyn ,
@Jaysyn@kbin.social avatar

It could literally be a minute wait & I still wouldn't use Chrome.

ericisshort ,

Google heard you and have increased the Firefox delay to 1m 30s. Would you please consider using Chrome now please?

bradv ,

Edge would like a word

db2 ,

Sigma Edging

FartsWithAnAccent ,
@FartsWithAnAccent@lemmy.world avatar

Best I can do is boycott YouTube.

Damage ,

Piped-bot now my best friend

Xabis ,

I swear every time i try to use those links from the piped bot, the content either never loads or has severe buffering problems.

SexualPolytope ,
@SexualPolytope@lemmy.sdf.org avatar

You need to change your instance. Next time you face this, go to preferences and try changing the instance.

FartsWithAnAccent ,
@FartsWithAnAccent@lemmy.world avatar

I didn’t know you could do that with piped, thanks

pirat ,

Where would one find that bot?

Damage ,

On here

pirat ,

Oh, the one that finds every YouTube link and comments a piped link in some communities? Yeah, I find that bot very useful too!

Engywuck ,

Ranting on Lemmy about a company while being addicted to (one of) their products seems to be much more effective, according to other comments in this thread. /s

tetris11 ,
@tetris11@lemmy.ml avatar

Helpful comment!

Engywuck ,

The only helpful thing to do is stopping using YT, if you think they behave in an unrespectufl way. Complaining/ranting on Lemmy is going to be exactly as helpful as my previous comment. But, hey, who cares? I don’t even use it. Literally, not my problem.

FartsWithAnAccent ,
@FartsWithAnAccent@lemmy.world avatar

What are we supposed to complain about then?

Engywuck ,

I didn’t say you shouldn’t complain. I said that doing it is useless. Stop using YT if you want to send a message or just deal with it ¯_(ツ)_/¯

FartsWithAnAccent ,
@FartsWithAnAccent@lemmy.world avatar

I’m gonna boycott and complain.

rentar42 ,

Wait. Again?

LostXOR ,

Not happening for me currently, but that definitely sounds like something Google would do. Good thing Firefox lets you easily change your user agent.

alphapuggle ,

Holy fuck I hope they get the pants sued off of them

refurbishedrefurbisher ,

Best we can do is 0.001% of their profit from last fiscal year and no prison time.

Infiltrated_ad8271 , (edited )
@Infiltrated_ad8271@kbin.social avatar

I didn't see it, I guess ublock again saved my ass before I could realize it.

Quacksalber ,

I really hope they try this in the EU. The EU regulatory agencies have been on a roll lately.

DepressedCoconut ,

They are doing it here to.

phillaholic ,

Reading the comments, It looks to be ad related, and maybe Firefox’s built in privacy tools are the root of the problem?

Fafner ,
@Fafner@yiffit.net avatar

It’s a Google problem, Firfox’s built in privacy tools are working as intended.

phillaholic ,

🙄 and they sometimes break sites by accident. I’m not saying it’s Firefox’s fault to fix. If you read the comments on the reddit post, there are several users looking at the code and finding what’s happening and it’s not tied to user agent.

db0 OP ,
@db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

If that was the case, then a user-agent switch wouldn’t fix it

phillaholic ,

old.reddit.com/r/youtube/comments/…/ka0myef/

PrincessLeiasCat ,

Ignoring all the other obvious reasons, FF is always superior to Chrome for YT because of its simple PIP.

This is a must have, especially if I’m at work and want to keep up with any myriad of live events.

Reverendender ,

Does not happen for me Safari or Firefox.

db0 OP ,
@db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

They may not be deploying this to all users

Imgonnatrythis ,

What does that mean? If you logout and go anonymous do you still have the issue?

db0 OP ,
@db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

It’s probably limited to regions rather than user accounts.

Imgonnatrythis ,

This is testable with vpn

Nawor3565 ,

Possibly. It’s impossible to know how they keep track of who to roll it out to. It could be IP-based, or they could put a cookie on your browser that could stick around even after you log out.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •