• zbyte64@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    If you view people as purely advertising receptacles then this business move is logical. But if you view people as agents that can build their own alternatives or advertise your services then this would seem to be a dumb business move.

    • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      If you view people who actively cost you money while bringing nothing to your business as assets you’re bad at business.

      If 100% of people who used adblockers decided to stop using YouTube entirely over this, the only result would be YouTube saving money. Video hosting is simply too expensive for anyone to make a website where anyone can host and view for free without ads.

      • F4lcon@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        People will find alternatives. You can’t stop people witj adblockers from using YouTube by blocking adblockers - no more than you can stop piracy. People just build better, more resilient ways to bypass things. This decision has good understanding of business but not psychology.

        The only real way is to make it more convenient to use YouTube with ads, so no one goes for adblockers anyway.