YouTube Has Gone Too Far This Time
Вставка
- Опубліковано 26 вер 2024
- In this video I discuss how UA-cam is artificially slowing down videos in the Firefox browser artificially to probably get people to use Chromium browsers that Google has more control over.
My merch is available at
based.win/
Subscribe to me on Odysee.com
odysee.com/@Al...
₿💰💵💲Help Support the Channel by Donating Crypto💲💵💰₿
Monero
45F2bNHVcRzXVBsvZ5giyvKGAgm6LFhMsjUUVPTEtdgJJ5SNyxzSNUmFSBR5qCCWLpjiUjYMkmZoX9b3cChNjvxR7kvh436
Bitcoin
3MMKHXPQrGHEsmdHaAGD59FWhKFGeUsAxV
Ethereum
0xeA4DA3F9BAb091Eb86921CA6E41712438f4E5079
Litecoin
MBfrxLJMuw26hbVi2MjCVDFkkExz8rYvUF
The fact that google had the audacity to do this during their Antitrust trial where part of the accusation is that they are using their market control over one type of product to divert users to their product in other areas is astounding.
jew love to see it
@@cl8804go home Nazi.
It’s all for a show. (([They])) know that the gov they control (ZOG) will slap them on the wrist.
Based on the code I 100% think this is not deliberate targeting, but just poor QA testing
We need a new platform with no censors and availability on mobile and consoles
For years UA-cam has treated its creators poorly. Now it's being made exceedingly clear to viewers that they intend to treat everyone poorly.
When the creators are hurt, everyone else is hurt along with them.
Demonitizing creators without any reason while allowing malicious ads, scam ads, and even the ads with extremely inappropriate content inside it.
It seriously needs numerous class action lawsuits with the fine as big as 10% total Google asset to stop this effectively
@@sihamhamda47 I'm praying on youtube's downfall at this point.
@@vrilcelthen what will we watch then?
@@BadContentCreator193rumble
A couple of years ago I was using Firefox as my main browser. Whenever I uploaded a video on UA-cam through Firefox, with a 1GBPS internet connection, it took around 25-40minutes. I downloaded Chrome to see if there was any difference. 2-3 minutes upload time. It all makes sense now...
Yea my friend also once claimed that UA-cam artificially slows down video upload speeds on firefox browser
teoria conspiratiei sa mi pice tiglele de pe casa
PENK??? :D Mă bucur să te văd așa random pe net. (sau poate nu e random și clipul mi-a fost recomandat pentru că ai comentat tu, no idea)
Anyway, I bought premium a while ago. Both before and after, my laptop loads YT (on Firefox) in 5+ seconds while my PC does it (still in Firefox) in half a sec. Weird. Could be my specs.
Nu ma asteptam sa te vad aici dintre toate locurile :))))
use brave browser, literally no ads anywhere and has some anti-malware bult-in in the browser which is great.
UA-cam VASTLY overestimate how anoying it is to wait 5s and VASTLY underestimate how little I (we) want to watch ads. Not to mention that I've been on FF for years and have noticed no difference recently.
Considering that firefox's market share is tiny compared to chrome, this move by YT is just them being absurdly petty
I would not be suprised if this would be part of reason why its this tiny. From what i heard google was kneecapping for years in lot of ways across their whole portfolio of services.
omg I didn't even think of that 😂 Google is such a fucking joke
they just but fire fox on people radar like they did with ADsblock
welp. their own control freaking is what's driving ppl to switch off chrome in the first place so can't even laugh about this any more. I used to use a chrome book and thought chrome was phenomenal (used to)
but firefox has consistently gotten better and more user friendly with each passing year while google has uhhhh....
I’d argue the same about the majority of ad block users. They made the market share grow by trying to make a big fuss out of it. 😂
Holy crap I always thought my friend's Firefox was so slow to load UA-cam because of adblocking. To actually learn Google is artificially sabotaging Firefox is insane.
is it tho?
insane as "wtf they doin broo" yes
insane as "wtf didn't think it was gonna happen" nahhh
@@troll_486t is insane as in "never thought they'd do it" because this is illegal as their actions damage the image firefox has towards the public
Adblock doesn't make anything slower to load. Because you're loading LESS things on the page.
Besides, Adblocking makes your browser faster, not slower.
only element hiding could possibly slow things down and it's not doing much of that here.
It's unsurprising, given who owns UA-cam... an advertising company with a competing browser. It is just unethical
Chrome isn't a competing browser.
Something isn't competing, when it basically has a monopoly (btw i never know who to hate most between microsoft and google because they just keep one upping each other in doing the worst thig possible)
@@no_name4796 It's still by definition a competing browser.
@@no_name4796 yea, I also forgot Chromium backbones other browsers aswell... Basically a monopoly in the browser scene.
Nah, firefox is not from chromium
Should be broken-up using antitrust law.
I swear that every big company is destroying themselves this year
UA-cam, Twitch, Discord, Reddit, Twitter, Unity, and now UA-cam again???
Hmm and yet they're still here, funny
@@RussianBot69420it’s almost like there grasp on online entertainment is way to strong and they have damn near no competition
I remember unity as clear as day and the non unity users and people who aired on other engines were having a field day
As a fire fox user i've absolutely seen this phenomina occuring.
It was way worse yesterday, sometimes i'd think the page would never load. But it's fine today.
me too, i thought it was just my laptop being bad, totally did not make me consider switching to chrome
Because ublock origin is blocking this since yesterday
I'm using Opera and it's not been a problem. I'm also using uBlockOrigin on Opera and it's always worked. If you do try it you have to disable the built in ad blocker for YT, letting uBlock run solo.
It is happening to me on both opera and firefox 🤦🏾♂️🤦🏾♂️
This was happening to me too on Firefox!!
It’s insane that they keep getting away with literally criminal practices like this
If they control our internet search results then who is going to stop them?
Even if they're such a large scale company, the consequences will catch them from behind
Nah. Makes perfect sense. Think about who is responsible for punishing them. It's the people who most heavily rely upon them to spy on the public. To slap them down for this kind of activity would be to break their own tool over their knee. They're not going to do that.
The EU comission actually did start to mess with them because they told them adblockers are not illegal and if they would happen to block UA-cam in the whole Europe it would be Google's loss
One of the many reasons I don't want to pay for UA-cam is that playback with the screen off is a paid feature. That should not be legal.
I love how UA-cam's idea to artificially worsen performance on Firefox is just to give users the same experience they get on the official UA-cam app.
Literally 😂 😂 😂 yesterday i was watching stuff on my phone and it was skipping/lagging frames and audio for like 20 minutes, even after multiple close-open attempts. Madness.
Sure that’s not your phone? My experience is pretty smooth with the app
@@luipaardprint Apps are bloatware. Always.
The rule goes: if the app is larger than a few kilobytes, it's bloat.
@@yeetyeet7070doesn't change the fact that it may be the person's phone malfunctioning instead of the app.
@@aff77141hold down the app button. Go to the info page. Clear the cache.
Hope that helps.
Not saying this will fix it, but it maaaaaaay just be your cache.
Never know.
Sorry if you are already ahead of this. Don't mean to be condescending
As I am an habitual Firefox and uBlockOrigin user, I am sincerely happy to know that I fall into the category which is usually protected by the national ConsumerProtectionLaws. This video needs more traction and cloud because of the underhanded methods used by todays big-tech.
Not gonna lie, I am as much apalled as I am disgusted by this; as well thankfull for your clear report on this.
Many thanks
I use Firefox and ublock origin but no matter what I do the videos are blocked. They played for about a day but when I flushed cache and update the filters it doesn't work anymore.
@@NealHartsChannel good one. I tried it myself while fiddling. Thanks, because it also works for me.
On mobile I insta-block the adds out of principle. That's my next site to figure
@@NealHartsChannel Ghostery currently works on firefox.
imagine using PascalCase for software names lmao
Honestly that is lame solution to the "problem". Did they already lay off all their good programmers ?
I've using Firefox since the begging, but I never used any adblocker with it.
Well, I'm gona try this filter for uBlock Origin ... Is this what YT wants me to do ?
Mozilla should sue them, the proof is already in the code.
Why is it happening with Chrome users using adblockers? Why is it not doing the same thing on my Firefox? There is no proof, the code shows that it's for ad interuptions and since the ad can't load the code breaks and its shows a blank screen for 5 seconds and then resumes.
@@0Bennymangoogle fanboy, gtfo
Problem is I'm pretty sure Google actually sponsors Mozilla, so it keeps it's competitor alive.
Mozilla as a company is also pretty shit from what i learned recently.
@@0Bennyman I tested it myself just now. I got a simple spoofer and checked all my open youtube tabs. Refresh, 5 seconds of nothing, then page loads. I spoofed to chrome, everything loaded immediately. Turned spoofer off. Refresh took five seconds. I did this off and on another three times and the results are consistent.
@@Kiritomenshow so?
i wanna donate to the ublock devs, they are doing god's work.
they aren't doing god's work
they are ANGELS
no.@@epicellableu5245
@@epicellableu5245they are literal gods
They don’t take donations but instead encourage to donate to the people that create and maintain the adlists
@@garydeluce464 Raymond Hill of uBO is absolutely one of the most based dev alive
Im in Europe and i have this, i noticed it since the beginning, but i assumed it was the ad-block detector trying to do its thing and slowing me down, but no, its exclusive to Firefox, i knew google did things like this in past (particularly with video previews not working in Firefox), this just proves that Google really needs to whipped hard into shape by some anti-monopoly lawsuits.
I am getting the same on a chromium browser. Thorium sometimes triggers this thing too. No idea why as the user agent should be perfectly valid. I also can't play Spotify with that browser which makes no sense.
Have you ever experienced the full UI to lock in a permanent loading while the video was playing fine?
I also had that, preventing me to navigate the website for around 10 seconds. Quite annoing.
@@tuttocrafting Yes. I've had that on Brave. There's an invisible frame in front of the window that won't let you do anything. If you were to some how block that as well, it should work like normal.
I don't have these issues with or without uBlock and with or without YT Premium on Fiefox on Linux. I live in the Philippines. I doubt it is the region. I always had more issues in the Philippines than in Germany before, when it comes to responsiveness of websites or download speeds in general.
But I can say for sure, that since I switched to Linux, everything, even website loading times, are faster.
It also happens on Chrome, it's extremely likely to be related to adblock detection
This is insane! Being a Firefox user, I currently have exactly this problem. But not only when I first start a video, but also constantly while watching it. Hovering with the mouse over the video, waiting for the navigation icons to appear, so I can pause the video or change the volume, the icons won't show for seconds. Also, the entire UA-cam website freezes from time to time for a few seconds while browsing for new videos. It started to be unusable. At first I thought its the RAM, running out for Firefox, so I killed it via Task Manager again and again. But your suggestion with the User Agent Switcher did the trick. YT no longer reacts so sluggish. Thanks!
I've had a similar experience but put it down to various plausible possible factors, like leaving far too many tabs open (even using add-ons to better manage them) and generally multitasking too much when my rig is long overdue an upgrade. Meanwhile, app devs continue to put out bloated, over-designed, resource-hogging monsters (and the ecosystem is about as bad on desktop as it is on mobile). Web devs aren't much better, with Big Tech being the worst for insisting on dynamic webpages (how am I supposed to know the page has actually finished loading when most of its content is dynamic and loaded in-page? or will it even finish loading a working page?)
So, natch, I figure Google is just leading the way with that kind of user-unfriendly BS that's now everywhere, on top of their usual sneakiness like tracking in all its forms. Finding this out, I'm not surprised from a corp that spends millions fighting antitrust cases and bends/breaks the law knowing any fees they might have to pay will be recouped by the profit generated just in the time it takes for their legal team to travel back from court.
Nope, Big G really will pull no punches when it comes to pushing itself and its products/interests to the top of the pile, even if that means trampling over the user base they profit off. Fudging your code to target certain demographics of users to not only passively leech off them but actively disadvantage them? That's the kind of behaviour you expect from script kiddies and amateur black-hats.
Let them. Whatever they stop doing openly, they'll keep doing what they do covertly as long as they can. It only spoils their sketchy reputation and pushes more users away bit by bit, but best of all, it just makes folks like add-on maintainers build better tools, understand the systems better, and become better devs in the process. It's like piracy, a constant game of whack-a-mole played by suits who know a lot about business but nothing about the practical reality of tech. If a protective mechanism exists, there either is already a workaround, or one's being worked on.
Anyway, rant over. tl;dr: try harder, Google.
To be fair, Mozilla is terrible with ram. They were Once a good browser. Now they suck.
Did you buy YT Premium? How was it then? I refuse to be extorted into buying it. I just restart my computer when the block pops up.
Wow the fact that the user agent switcher worked confirms that it was likely an extreme version of the recently tested antifeature
i genuinely think Google seriously need to be fined billions of dollars for their abhorrent actions, and continually fined just a bit more then their annual proffit every year until they stop doing this, they also need to be fined for their absurd levels of censorship.
Absolutely. The will never learn otherwise.
Goog...is the gov, the gov is g.....le. what is the consequence?
@@tiergeist2639 ???? The european union is not a governmental org. And google is located in america. not europe. Stupid comment.
I would love that but they can only be fined if they are actually breaking the law. Idk if in this situation they are or not. Probably tho
Monopoly, the market would punish them, if there was a market. Instead everyone has to meet their standards for speech.
I genuinely believe this has to be stupidity rather than malice on some level. With all of the antitrust lawsuits going on right now, this doesn't make sense. The look on Google's lawyer's face when their rep said that they give Apple something like 30% of the ad revenue generated from safari clients in return for having google as the default search engine on safari on MacOS & iOS was a look of defeat and cringe. Their lawyers have to be telling them to not rock the boat with anything they do.
To do this so soon after, is just... incredibly ballsy, or someone being exceptionally stupid.
And to put it so blatantly in plain sight is what baffles me.
While the FTC are distracted in court they're making their move on Firefox 😱
very much agreed
UA-cam already has been caught before using exclusive Chrome API which didn't exist in Firefox and coincidentally made it run slower when loading videos
Whatever it may be, I personally do hope they get to answer for it soon enough. It's already ridiculous that they ever got away with their business practices, even more that they've never faced nearly enough scrutiny for it by anyone except the handful of people who do genuinely care.
Kudos to Google, though, for digging this hole like a stubborn donkey- maybe finally we'll have some diversity again.
Yup, I can confirm UA-cam is doing this. It's not even an anti-adblock thing anymore. They don't want people to use non Chrome browser. It's disgusting and underhanded.
Well they don't want people to use firefox so they can more effectively fuck their users with ads. Monopoly on viewership and all That.
on opera gx too can confirm
europe is about to do a lil trolling
I remember back in the days UA-cam used to have a slogan called broadcast yourself. Now that slogan is gone and UA-cam claims ownership to everybody's work
I remember that. Problem is that as lons as it your material, you can publish it also elsewhere. They can't do anything about it.
In the US, this could fall under the anti-monopoly and unfair practices laws. I'd love to see LegalEagle's take on it.
If I had money, I’d pay GOOD money for Legal Eagle to cover it
Only problem is that LegalEagle is a moron.
Send this to legal eagle, and send it to the press so other big media that not under alphabet Inc can make damning article, and the congress can put em under scrutiny like how Facebook got some.
Where were these laws when Google killed Opera browsing engine? It was the same thing, every Google service worked with bugs in Opera, even their search. The Opera developers attempted various workarounds to ensure consistent functionality, but eventually, they gave up for the Chromium engine. Nobody paid any attention.
Legal eagle is a leftist twat waffle that knows nothing. Why would you want to get his take? Lol.😂
Between a useless algorithm, blocking adblockers and arbitrarily delaying videos, google seem to be trying very hard to make youtube not worth using at all.
Google is showing that they hate the system of competition that made them the number 1 in the past. They don't want competition, they don't want more profit: they want NO competition and ALL the money.
@BERSERK_0_0_that's the point everyone should understand. In modern tech era there shouldn't be a singular alternative but set of alternatives that none of the alternatives dominates tech market.
@BERSERK_0_0_ The biggest one is ody+the-thing-you-do-with-your-eyes rn
@juettentube_ist_dreckcan you try to bypass it e.g. by doing this: - N a m e
Or
- N * a * m * e
Or sth else?
It's not about the wait times, it's about not experiencing the obnoxious advertising on YT. If YT wasn't so obnoxious with their ads, I wouldn't use adblock.
The more people using adblockers, the worst will be the experience for those who don’t use it.
@@nagyFerkothat’s an abusive way to frame it.
Here is a simplification of what is happening: “entitled” users act out, UA-cam gets mad and punished all users.
Let’s change the players: an “entitled” child acts out, their parent gets mad and punishes the other siblings.
See what I mean? You shouldn’t be mad your siblings got you punished, you should be mad your parent was abusive enough to harm you because of it. Same with this scenario, companies punishing you for the behaviour of others is wrong.
EDIT; if you were just being dramatic, and already knew that, then ignore this. But some people, much like abuse victims, really do genuinely believe it’s other users at fault for their worse experience when it was UA-cam who did it.
@@nagyFerkowell that’s obviously their problem, as you see FF marketshare is minuscule, and ads gotten ridiculous. I don’t feel bad for people stupid enough to keep supporting the monopoly, I’d rather support creators through any other means than watching snowball system ads, military recruitment aimed at prepubescent kids, screaming chimpanzees, or adidas next pseudo inclusive praise of certainly early death inducingly obese rainbowflag folks while at the same time producing shoes in Chinese concentration camps.
As the og comment said, it’s not about ads per se but the kind of ads that yt supports, even tho they are in an exclusive situation of having the worlds biggest choice and influence of the kind of ads they could push while choosing to prefer the most fraudulent, greenwashing and harmful to society ones.
Promoting things like government spending (which is FAKE and could lead to scams) and Temu (which is made by China and has a VERY shady background).
Idk id probably use an adblocker regardless. Not gonna sit here and pretend that I like seeing ads.
Wow, I've noticed my experience on youtube with Firefox seems to have been sluggish and generally crappier than usual for a while now. I had just assumed it was me having too many tabs open and too many other things running at the same time. And that's partially true, but youtube in particular has been really, _really_ obnoxiously slow. However, I just switched my user agent from what it actually is (Firefox/Linux) to Chrome/Windows and suddenly everything is unmistakably more responsive. Thanks for the tip! I don't think I would have realized this otherwise.
Been noticing this, figured it was just part of how uBlock was blocking UA-cam's ad detection. Installed a user agent changer and videos load instantly now. This is actually insane, and I'm looking forward to the inevitable EU lawsuit.
Surprisingly enough this has been going on for quite a while now if I remember correctly (especially in incognito).
Never thought about the user agent, gonna try it sometime when I use my PC
@@rawmeateaterLMAO it's just the uBlock Streisand Effect all over again
Thanks for the workaround idea!
Honestly I am kind of impressed with the pettiness at this point. Like I almost have to respect them. They are so power hungry that they will FORCIBLY take 3-5 seconds of your life for the sake of power alone. I can't wait to see what they come up with next!
This is why we need a competitor to UA-cam. We need to END this monopoly OURSELVES
We need a competitor to google itself, that would be better
It wont happen if the us keeps banning any real competitors
Don't you think it would've happened by now if it could? UA-cam operates at a pretty severe loss. Without Google's other sources of revenue it's impossible to sustain. They do it anyway because they're able and UA-cam offers them an easy way to control what people watch online. There's just no way an upstart could afford to maintain a userbase this huge and the insane amount of data needed to be stored and called upon every second. They'd inevitably have to sell out like UA-cam did with Google.
I believe China have their own video platform but it's China. There is also Japan's "niconico", i think.
They already exist, the problem is the lack of content.
We need to convince the big UA-camrs to switch to competitors.
This is insane. It has to bring more competition, and open lawsuits.
think google can say it is just code to insure that the player is loading properly on other browsers running different engines
as a scapegoat for what may look like deliberate sabotage to the function of other browsers to load media on their platforms to control market share thus dictate investment and ad share
but they are not doing that
@@nicknevco215It is literally a 5 second javascript delay. They can't lie about this.
@@nicknevco215They still can't say that, because they tried this thing before, and they were fined by the EU. I only hope this "accident" gets where it needs to.
Nowadays you can’t really "bring more competition", at least not as in "develop a new browser"
twitter.com/iavins/status/1705621562676908397
@@nicknevco215you can't just say "it's the code", if it's your company and you made the code you're responsible for presenting the evidence and justification in more detail. that lie won't hold up under questioning if/when a lawsuit comes up, there's no legitimate reason. the thing is, lawsuits and fines just don't matter to them. they'll get caught but who cares, they budget for legal fees and fines every year and it's pennies for them.
I would imagine that slowing Firefox down on UA-cam would be a violation of anti trust laws.
It totally is. Firefox is the only popular browser that doesn't use any Google stuff at all. They are 100% a competitor and if this goes public I imagine they're so going to get sued.
@@YellowPandaSomething I use Firefox on my phone to watch UA-cam. It has an adblocker and an extension to watch videos in the background or when the screen is off. It's a god send! If you have Android, it's worth downloading Firefox and those addons.
@@YellowPandaSomething Reposting as I don't think YT allowed it through. test
@@YellowPandaSomething I use Firefox on my phone to watch UA-cam. It has an adblocker and an extension to watch videos in the background or when the screen is off. It's a god send! If you have Android, it's worth downloading Firefox and those addons.
@@YellowPandaSomething I use Firefox on my phone to watch UA-cam. It has an adblocker and an extension to watch videos in the background or when the screen is off. If you have Android, it's worth downloading Firefox and those addons.
just because they realize chrome is shit dosent mean they can kneecap firefox
Sure it does. Nobody is going to stop them.
Microsoft did the same when their hardware was used under a different (read "better") DOS sometime in the 80s-90s.
Microsoft made it so the computer threw a warning about some bs error. regular computer people didn't give a shit and breezed past it on every startup, but common users were deterred from the microsoft's competitor since "MS-DOS didn't have any errors" so, yeah, Google's going for the same strategy here
@@atomic_bomba ublock origin devs are saving us, thank the heavens
They can and will do any evil thing they want, because humans suck, this is hell, and everything is going to burn.
@@youtuberobbedmeofmyname fr tho
When I see big tech do stuff like this it just makes me feel extremely justified for being a revanced enjoyer
Can you give the link to download revanced? Or at least tell where to find it
@@violinher0you have to make the APK with the revanced manager
@@hrhodes2768it says split apk when i select youtube and doesnt allow me to mod it. Why?
@@hrhodes2768makes sense that you gotta use a code borker to bork youtube code to make better youtube app
It seems like youtube has deleted my replies to the guy asking for the revanced link because i directly gave the link in the replies.
One thing you should learn about these organizations is THEY DON’T CARE! If they CAN do it, they WILL.
Time for Google to make up their minds... First they push me to Firefox by making it the only browser where adblocking UA-cam still works reliably and now they don't want me there and add a 5 second delay? Like c'mon, what do you want from me?
Then again, it's kind of funny how they expect me to care about 5 seconds of silence, but not be driven away by 5 unskippable 30-second ads in a row...
I use brave and have zero issues
They probably want you to stop using their service for free 🙉 what a diabolical thing to do
@@Hiraichiif they dont want us to use UA-cam for free, then dont offer it for free?
@@Hiraichihe only gives his personal data so yeah, "free" service.
Pay for their fucking service… lol broke ass shenanigans
As a Firefox user, this is considerably messed up and should be illegal.
It is illegal.
It’s veeery anti-competitive.
It’ll just take some time before US and/or EU reacts/becomes aware.
@@Mikkel111net neutrality is gone. it's perfectly legal to artificially throttle, block, or slow connections to certain users. as soon as net neutrality went away everyone just gave up. its like the reddit protests. they failed, and everyone gives up immediately.
WE NEED to spread the word and make people switch to firefox!
@@accountclosed8805 except you can then tell mozilla to stop asking and that's it.
@@accountclosed8805 At least it isn't constantly asking me to swipe my credit card to get basic features. Death to Chrome! Visa slava Firefox!!!!
I recently switched to mainly using Firefox after UA-cam started it's anti-ad war campaign and I've been noticing these slower load times too. I just assumed it was to do with the adblocker I was using battling it out for five seconds, but now I know the truth. There is no way this can be legal, and if it somehow is legal then it shouldn't. This is really f'd up. Thanks for exposing this!
Fun fact: It actually wouldn't be legal for them to do this, as it would violate anti-trust laws in the US, especially if it was found that Google was intentionally targeting it's competitors. I'm a little more willing to believe it's a result of adblock as some chrome users have noticed this too, but it's still wild to think about. The only reason I don't think it's an intentional decision to slow down Firefox is because Google is already in the midst of a massive lawsuit right now, and it would only make their position even worse
It is illegal. That's the funny thing. Also like blocking ad blockers isn't legal I think. But now Google does market manipulation. And the EU really doesn't like this.
@@mayravixx25 did you even watch the video. They have javascript code that does this and if this was not true then they would not have a reason to delete the reditt comment. they are definetly hiding something
pretty much same with me
It's their site, they can do whatever they want... our option? Let's find better website than youtube.
I think we should start a Chrome boycott. Enough people stop using Google's precious, they will reverse it quickly. I have never liked Chrome anyways but now I truly dislike it. Sadly, because Edge uses the Chromium engine, Firefox and other non-Chromium browsers is becoming more important.
Google is asking to get sued heavily, that can't be legal. Also that information should be spread everywhere on the internet, maybe it will convince more people, including normies who wouldn't care much otherwise, to switch to some non-Chromium browser.
It's anti-competitive behaviour and I'm sure if the FTC caught wind and isn't corrupted by Google's lobbying money, they'd hold them accountable.
The EU may also "bully" (in this content creators words) Google into behaving ethically but the outcome would only apply to EU countries
the sorce is trust me bro and reddit why are Gen Z mindless sheep
@@MauseDaysare you okay?
@@MauseDays bot
i swiched chrome to Thorium no more yt bs now everything work like before xdd
I'm impressed that Google keeps doubling down instead of taking an L, backing off for six months, then developing some new stealth pro-ad function after collective memory fades. A severe Streisand effect is happening instead, it's great.
They govt has their back, they're good
@@kylespevak6781how?
@@engi3583 Literally all of the ways they get to censor, yet the freedoms of a utility. Best of both worlds always, because the govt also uses them and their "fact checkers" to push/hide certain opinions
@@kylespevak6781 The EU tech commission will fall on them like a ton of bricks
@@quisqueyanguy120google IS the internet now, not like EU can count on Russian data servers and infrastructure.
Google deserves as much public scrutiny as Microsoft if not more for trying to push Chrome deep down our holes whenever we access Google's websites through Edge, Firefox, Brave etc. The "switch to Chrome" pop-ups have been getting absolutely ridiculous lately. And now they're going several steps further to slow down the experience for non-Chrome users. "Don't be evil" eh?
Microsoft also deserves way more scrutiny, they should have been snipped much harder in the 90s
Microsoft hasn't had "scrutiny" since the early 2000's. And all they got was a slap on the wrist. Both Microsoft and Google need to meet AT&T or Standard Oil's fate.
I Hope Google will get the same EU reality check treatment that micro$ just got.
Brave is a chromium browser. It's just a chrome reskin.
@@amiablereaper So is Edge.
I miss the 90's internet that rejected censorship, government abuse, and anti-competitive practices.
UA-cam is unironically trying to speedrun getting sued by the European Union
Google has lobbied the EU so much that I'm pretty sure everyone there is on their payroll.
@@FireOccator Than it up to Europeans to remove that payroll people
This reminds me of when Microsoft decided to put in some code in Windows 3x series that would make the software not run on DR-DOS but would run on MS-DOS just fine for which Microsoft was sued for as the developers of DR-DOS subsequently lost a lot of customers and it is safe to say that into the release of Windows 95, DR-DOS was not much of a thing anymore.
The specific code was called "AARD CODE" and the lawsuit against it led to a $250mil settlement towards Caldera Inc. which purchased DR-DOS IP according to Wikipedia (I did not know about this huge settlement before looking it up just now)...
Very interesting info.
When you are a monopoly on a market, you are not incentivized to improve, but to suppress competition. As UA-cam and Internet services move towards this direction, an increased drive towards decentralization will occur. Already platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram are experiencing issues with constant expansion. Over time, captured markets are devalued by their own actions, until consumers are forced to move towards open or new markets, etc.
if that got Microsoft sued then the same thing absolutely should happen for Google as well. companies should not be allowed to knock down competition with those sorts of dirty practises and i hope more people find out about this so something happens. i'm also confused as to why companies seem to think people just won't bother looking into their code to find fishy things... like do they not know or not care?
@@jacobp8294 their is even a term for it enshittification
now the question is: this fine is it lower than the money they made, probably yes, in the long term and then it just becomes a cost of doing business
UA-cam, runs ads on creators and doesn't pay them.
Also UA-cam, forces you to watch those ads and say pay for premium that won't support the creators.
Disgusting.
No there are enough solutions how to watch yt without advertising....just search for it with some search engine that is not google....yandex for example....works perfect
Under 1% are creators other 99% uploading other peoples work or commenting on other people work by showing the videos but muting it and repeating the talking themselves that is gross part.
corporations need that money so they can continue to have the funding to censor the internet and hold complete control over technological development
@@user-dd5kj2mj6kgive them an inch...
Add to this that one needs to skip each ad individually now. UA-cam used to be my TV alternative, but they keep becoming like TV.
I thought my internet was just having issues. Incredible how far they're willing to go to enforce their google supremacy
Same here
I guess i'm changing to firefox on android as well now. I'm ashamed to admit, but i have been paying for premium for 5 years, i guess its time to support adblockers instead.
I had also assumed that it was just my internet as well.
Same!
I actually do have Internet issues on my desktop that make using browsers difficult for the OS, so I'd never even notice this problem until I load up a VM to browse. 🙃
Firefox (my daily driver), Edge, and Chrome all have trouble loading and refreshing pages, and Steam has trouble uploading data. Discord and games all are unaffected, as are any browsers I use within a VM. Only thing I haven't tested is running a VM on my boot drive to verify it isn't undetected failing hardware, since I store all my images on a different drive.
09:48
This just shows how even if Google desperately tries to force everyone into their ecosystem like they want it to be, there will always be ways out
Realisticaly though if youtube force ads. It will fail
Because youtube videos are too much clickbait, disapointing, many minutes of time wasting instead of getting to the point
You have youtubers who on top of ads. Do sponsor videos like nordvpn or some internet games
It will collapse. People dont want to go on website where half their watch time is ads. And their other half is most of time clickbait/sponsor/time wasting
If they need money. How about be more chill about monetisation. And stop find any small joke reason to demonetise creators or videos
Maybe it's inevitable that every entity becomes a tyrant if it stays too long and has too much power. I started using Google maybe around 2001, and at that time Google was a minority search engine and most people were using Yahoo and others. I promoted Google to people around me. Even near 2010, Google/G-mail was still minority here until Android came in.
@@mathewvanostin7118 If they want money they should get a real job. "Content creator, influencer, vblogger." Only hobbists make valuable stuff. And pretty often there are no ads on their channel.
@@typingcatHistory teaches us that everything will eventually turn to ruin, either by their owns hands or sheer ignorance.
you do know that it's your behavior that creates incentive for Google to do this right? And if you want it to stop YOU have to stop being clueless about your data and online decisions. You cannot blame these tech giants when they use their keys to the city to shut off your water, so they can sell you bottled Google water. You gave them the keys and said "use every loophole to make the most possible money as quickly as possible, and if you don't we'll sue you". That's the reality of being a publicly traded internet corporation.
Your decisions inform their behavior. Until you all realize this and take responsibility for your own data and the laws being passed under your noses by corporate lawyers on your behalf, nothing can change. They are doing what, according to your choices, they are legally obligated to do. And that's to monopolize your attention, and divide you up into targeted leads for advertising platforms.
You wanted the "free" service model. You offer up your raw data in exchange. This is YOUR fault. Don't be out here acting like a victim.
This is a legit problem that I have been facing for months now. To the point it has been blatantly obvious that they have been doing this. I experience issues where they even make the home page not fully load. Thanks for putting this out there. I really hope Google faces the consequences.
Not in the USA, there will never be consequences.
The USA have a completely rigged judicial system which is not favoring the right thing, but the richest company.
It’s absolutely disgusting and it would never be like this in Europe!
The USA court system needs to be overthrown and finally justice has to be the deciding factor!
Yeah, same, on Firefox mobile app. That's why I installed brave for my phone.
i literally had that issue yesterday, thought it was just youtube redux acting up
Also if you use YT music you need to reload the site, because the music does not load on the first try.
This has been happening to me lately. It won't make me want to stop using Firefox, in fact it only solidifies my browser choice even more.
How long does it normally take you to load the youtube? Does 3-5 sec is ok for firefox?
I use Firefox and wondered about this delay. This reminds me of the Microsoft antitrust case with internet explorer. I can see this possibly turning into a big problem for Google as this is technically an anti competitive practice against Firefox…
This is worse than anything MS did to Netscape back in the browser wars with the bundling, this is injecting malicious code to make your competitors products seem broken to their customers.
@@treelineresearch3387search "msn opera user agent". This is exactly what MS did!
There's no 'technically' about it, it's completely blatant.
Yeah I find myself automatically descend into a foul mood every time I start using UA-cam. It’s like being in an abusive relationship where just going about your normal activities gets you nothing but a negative reaction and disrespectful attitudes.
Same. I've noticed I can wake up in a good mood, and after 20 minutes of youtube, I'd feel like crap.
Or its like getting one of the greatest resources in human history for free? Don't be so god damn dramatic
You may want to check your spelling. I think you meant "Modern marriage"
Sounds a lot like my ex 😅
I was 3 steps ahead of the ad blocking for a while now. Hardened browser with a moustache, dns sink all that jazz for me and ublock origin for everyone who asked for a better browsing experience.
Everyone is ringing me up! UA-cam isnt working anymore! That youtube app you installed is gone! (re/vanced got removed by Play protect).
This is virtual burglary!
3:42 apparently this code has to do with handling adblockers and not necessarily Firefox or other non-chrome browsers, but the mitigations I cover around 9:30 still work to bypass the 5 second delay.
👽
I have had this exact issue whenever i open a new page it takes way longer to load for no apparent reason. But only sometimes and sometimes it works just fine.
lol lmao
Yup
Yup, I'm facing the same issue with Brave browser.
Fast forward to 1st of August, UA-cam got slowed down on Firefox once again
Google did the same thing years ago back when Firefox was getting into the whole rapid-release thing, they got caught intentionally increasing UA-cam loading times if you used a browser that wasn't based on Chromium. This isn't new, and not all that surprising that they're attempting to get away with this again.
However, this seems much worse...
pretty sure this is going to make the EU courts even more likely to fine them large sums of money...
Glory to the brotherhood
Last time they hid their intentions by using a new browser API that "just so happened" to not be supported by Firefox very well yet. This time the devs didn't even bother...
It blows my mind that companies think intrusive advertising actually works. A study by Wunderkind showed that 91% of shoppers will not buy from brands they have seen intrusively advertised on UA-cam and Facebook videos. It does nothing but ruin the experience. It's one of the many reason I quit Facebook, and if I didn't have Premium, I'd probably quit UA-cam because of it. It will get to a point where both platforms will end up dead because people do not want to watch adverts.
I grew up when ad time was regulated during the 3-hour primetime block. You got 5 minutes out of 30 and 10 out of 60. 1978 comes along and bamm! deregulation of that restriction means they can put whatever amt they want. So we now have 10 or so out of 20 and 20 or so out of 60. When I signed up with netflix dvd in 2006 and then came streaming (I had directv too with HBO and couple of other 'premium' channels), I was happy. Streaming meant no ads and no on-screen crap like channel logos and hashtags. I still have their streaming, along with amazon prime and paramount+. I am waiting to see how amazon destroys their currently-free-of-ads video function before I pay $3/month to get rid of them.
I could not sit through any current tv show with the ad structure. As for UA-cam, well, incognito windows are working for now (I watch them there and come back to the regular window to like and comment).
Ads on phones drive me up the wall. If they were static, I'd deal with them, but they are all despicable video for crap I will never buy. Besides, I've always felt that by using video ads you are stealing my cpu's power to run the ad. I don't like that.
Oh, here's another way to pick and choose whose products / services to buy: If a company is a corporate naming rights john for a stadium or event, then I go out of my way to NOT buy their stuff. I can't avoid them all, but I do my best. To me naming rights is the same as the world's oldest profession. College bowl games and stadiums of all sorts are the common examples. I still don't buy Tostitos stuff because they were the john for the fiesta bowl for 18 years. I'll eat them, I just won't buy them, as I don't want to be thought of as being so easily manipulated because they were the john for the event. Yeah, my friends and family think I might have lost a screw or two.
Yup. Greedy and shameless imbeciles can't actually control people just because they have market share.
The bigger they are, the harder they fall.
Im on the same boat when they introduced short. But now I subscribe to spotify instead. It’s got whole lot better than before as I remembered. The downside is the video functionality
Wait: you pay for evil? Seriously?
I guess someone has to if it isn't us because we have better options than paying for what essentially is "We are selling the solution to our own problem we started in the first place." - Google @@grandstarstudiosFORMER-YT
UA-cam fighting AD block users is like UA-cam looking through the living room couch for spare change.
i'm not so sure about that when 60% of users is using some sort of adblock
@@fissavids8767show me scam and other harmful stuff and I will avoid it anyway I can 🤷
Fiss, users who use adblock do so because the ads themselves are too intrusive. It's like an idiot banging pots in your living room, you can pay them to leave, but they will come back, or you can just install locks in your house to stop the idiot from breaking in.
can’t believe they are trying to block ad blockers, so stupid. Internet users felt so free back in the mid 2010s with Adblock so those repetitive annoying kinds of UA-cam ads can go away, but now Google finally wants to do something about it, which is just dumb
It’s not just Firefox, I had this happen on Google Chrome too. Smh my head UA-cam.
It isn't just firefox. It's pretty much any browser that has UB enabled. Their JS loads a kinda 'blank' overlay and checks if it's being blocked or not. This is trash-tier behavior from Google and I hope they are held accountable for this sometime in the near future
Apparently this is happening to Microsoft Edge, Brave, and Opera also. The audacity of UA-cam is abhorrent, and absolutely infuriating.
Yeah, I also experienced it with Microsoft Edge and Opera GX that is just crazy
Oh no i use brave
My college is fucked they use Edge exclusively
Brave seems unaffected so far.
@@le0shadow i think its starting to happen with me, the videos are loading for a few seconds
EDIT: nvm it was a network issue
The best way of mitigating this behaviour is to simply stop using Google products. Switching away from everything else is a doddle, but switching from YT is genuinely difficult because most of the content and passing trade is here...
Dude I would love to switch to UA-cam Alternatives. but the problem is there's barely any videos up there, and if it does get popular enough Google is going to attempt to buy them. That just shows that UA-cam is a monopoly in the video creation Market whatever you want to call it.
is that DX-ball profile pic?
@@troll_486It looks like the Amiga Boing ball
Boycotting will never work, everyone be like "im gonna use it nobody will notice hehe"
@@troll_486i thought so too lol
Usually what happens to me is the page just refuses to load altogether. Refreshing doesn't help, but opening a new tab with the same destination magically fixes it...
Yup, can confirm the User-Agent Switcher instantly fixes the issue. This is really bad for Google, since there is no possible excuse or explanation other than unfair competitive practices.
Considering how in the code is noted "ad-interrumpting" for the delay, my guess is they planned to argue the function is not to slow down firefox but rather to create a delay for the ad to play which only doesn't play due to user-side alterations, creating an empty space when using ad-block.
@@Pedroebut I wondered why I have been getting a lot of very short ads recently (6 seconds length). You are probably onto something. I personally only block the minimum of ads, using my own method which allows most ads through, but allows blocking the obnoxious or overly long video ads and lets all page ads (picture) through as normal.
@@Pedroebut the problem is that is is actually happening with those who payed for premium too, I got premium from a friend and Firefox has to reload for me the same way. It's not just for ads that are being blocked, it's purposefully trying to make Firefox a worse viewing experience
yeah, competition should make companiey strive for innovation. Hurting competitors is not innovation and actually counteracts innovation
its so insane to me that these companies go OH SHIT WE LOSIN PROFIT WHAT DO WE DO and then come to the decision that instead of making their product function better or more enticing to its customers they will just pick a group of their customers blame them and wage war against them. fucking GENIUS
i wouldn't say genius. I'd call it uncreative and lazy. It's a desperation move, and it's probably to cover up something much worse that they are doing.
They would get a lot more money if they vastly reduced the price such that everyone might then be willing to pay - but they want something like 14 bucks a month which is more than I pay for Netflix high quality streaming (and Netflix has costs to actually make content, YT gets their content for free). If YT premium were like a buck a month, maybe but instead, I have already switched from Chrome to Firefox and that then is costing Google even more as now they don't see my traffic (and I switched to Duck Duck Go as default search). Way to go UA-cam!
POV: The majority of your earnings don't originate from satisfied customers.
😂💯
@@BlueDisasterever heard of sarcasm?
At this point, I kind of hope that UA-cam succeeds at making their platform unusable. It will finally give us some (viable) competitors, and I might become more productive.
As long as it's not Microsoft that's the competitor. I'm sick of dealing with their BS.
I mean the platform is already almost unusable, go back 10 years and see how smooth youtube used to be, people just get used to shit and don't know any better.
On the contrary, the competition should do better than UA-cam, but they don't, all of those "UA-cam alternatives" have all the problems of UA-cam and zero of the benefits.
I'm sure there's a company who can't wait serve 4k videos to the entire world, free of charge with no ads!
Ive been spending less and less time on youtube. I am now using soundcloud for music, if i wanna watch some shorts i go on insta and sometimes i come here and watch the slow downfall of youtube.
The death of every large company is fear. Which fuels greed and desperation. Many gaming companies have gone down that path. Chrome will be no different unless it gets its act together. At this point chrome is attacking other web apps. That's an attack. The worst part is they're trying to be sneaky about it instead of honest. Bite back by threatening their reputation. You lose it all whe you lose reputation. It's the only language they'll understand.
the sneaky is one that will be uncovered for years to come.
I know google feels like they are "too big to fail" , but that arrogance is really going to push everyone away to the point its REALLY gonna start hurting their bottom line. I guess they want to be the textbook example of "what happens if we push too far"
Or this is twitter zoomers spreading mass panic and delusion. there is no facts here. the source for this info is trust me bro and reddit why are Gen Z mindless sheep
that's a hopeful way to look at it. this idea assumes people won't just lie down and take it through ignorance or willful apathy/"convenience". Then there's the third kind of person who won't believe it's happening and claim "source is trust me bro" and think they're so "red pilled" while bashing sites with the same ideologies (i.e. reddit)
95% of youtube users have no idea that this is happening, and they never will.
@@castles990 considering they are censoring and slowly doing things to keep people out of the loop, yeah. The funny thing is they definitely are violating a lot of laws and this is exactly the kind of stuff why monopolies are illegal. Even if google is "technically" not in a monopoly, the fact they control and manipulate this much shows we're in dire need of revamping on technology laws.
how are you all this delusional? Google is a publicly traded corporation. You bought into the "free" service model because you liked how convenient it was to not think about what digital services cost. You require that all publicly traded corporations increase their value every year in order to keep up with an infinite growth theory of economics that was never founded in scientific, or even mathematical reality. You continue to offer up your raw data in exchange for services, as well as your blind attention.
Their ONLY choice to meet growth metrics and avoid being sued into bankruptcy is to monopolize your attention, and funnel as many people into their attention-based ecosystem as legally possible so they can sell more data and advertising. It's a never ending cycle of replacing content with consumerist propaganda that you yourself signed up for and continue to support.
And that YOU is YOU, all of YOU. Turn off history, delete data, only use your own curated subscription feeds, and stop pretending you're a fking victim in any of this. What you are is a pureBred Fukpotato tasering yourself over and over again because you're so mad at tasering yourself the first time.
I would recommend against using a user agent switcher. Instead when you see this behavior, the best thing to do is to just flat out stop using youtube or at least to reduce it to the absolute minimum. Here's why:
Features like this aren't just globally enabled, platforms like youtube will do test runs where they roll out new functions to a small user group and then check if it has the desired effects. If it does, they will increase the numer of users who see that new functionality and they will keep tracking if the positive effects can be reproduced in a larger test group. if they are happy, they will enable the feature for all users.
So when google rolls out this new 'feature' to a new set of users and sees that the firefox users among them immediately stop using youtube, that will send a clear signal to google that they messed up.
If instead the firefox users in that group start using chrome instead (which is what google will observe when you use a user agent switcher) that will send a clear signal to google that their change did exactly what they wanted to achieve and they will roll it out to more users and eventually enable it globally. Also they will probably start trying to detect if you are using a user agent switcher and add delays or paywalls for those users as well.
This is a very good point actually
You're pretty dumb if you think people will just stop using youtube lol.
Hell, this is a pretty stupid thing to do from google themselves, Firefox marketshare is real small, any normie who uses Firefox and experiences that behavior will go back to Chrome anyway.
The few of us who use Firefox will just keep finding workarounds.
like mental outlaw, i think this is the domain of the law
while i know we live in the cyberpunk dystopia where we are pretty much ruled by these companies, i still think trying to steer a company into good deeds by telling them the shady businees practice isn't profitable is not the way to go
they will try to develop and implement the same shady business practice in a way that works, especially if there is not even a slight deterrent
as the quote tenuously attributed to napoleon goes, “let us wait a little; when your enemy is executing a false movement, never interrupt him.”
I'd rather waste their bandwidth, I still don't get any fucking ads. I have an HDD that I can literally download videos non-stop just to burn as much of their bandwidth as possible
Agreed, I was about to comment on that
This shit is insane, big tech companies are absolutely out of control and goes on to show why regulation will ALWAYS be needed, this is some of the most anti-consumer shit imaginable and they're not even trying to be subtle about it anymore, regulatory bodies desperately need to be given tools to stop this type of shit in their tracks.
Regulation? not really. DIversity? Yes. If it is regulated it would just become the TV news where speech is limited. You just need a good enough competitor or better, multiple competitors.
@@d.n9283 Are you not seeing what's happening? There's plenty of competition in the browser world right now and yet Google is still enacting some blatantly anti-consumer practices to not only expand but also reinforce their current dominance of the market share, including practices that border on actively sabotaging those who don't use their product on their terms, this video itself is proof why regulation is needed and you're coming at me with some "muh market" rhetoric? Cmon.
@@d.n9283 What this guy said. Competition always brings challenge to monopolies, forcing them to actually make good change, and this usually happens faster and ends up being more effective than putting regulation anyways.
@@d.n9283 Waiting for a competing product and market forces is equivalent to "do nothing" for most people. The people want UA-cam to stop fucking with them NOW, they don't want to juggle 2-3 different video sites like they are forced to do with streaming services. Most people don't have the capital to create a competitor to Google from thin air, so why shouldn't they use the levers of power that they DO have access to?
I think we all know what the track record is for breaking monopolies is if we compare "the competition" and governments.
@@d.n9283No amount of competition protects the customers. Tech companies have shown time and again that they'll push the envelope until they get slapped by governments. Self-regulation doesn't work.
the moment ads become unavoidable, i will stop watching yt
Ironically UA-cam recommended this video to me.
Hard to imagine what benefit Google would get from adding a 5 second delay only for Firefox users. Almost seems like something that escaped a testing environment and was never intended for the production JS code. I might be giving them too much credit though.
Making firefox and others seem worse so that people switch to chrome or other chromium browsers, that's why.
@@BERSERK_0_0_ it could have also been probably implemented on the backend, throttling Firefox made requests.
I agree, they could've made their server respond to requests slower based on the user agent string, assuming they have that kind of control over their request handling. I'm not doubting that there's some funny business going on with Firefox loading times, there definitely is... but are we even sure that the 5 second delay code that was shown is the video is the actual cause? The code shown in the video has not yet been properly deobfuscated, only deminified and deobfuscation is a very intensive process afaik.
Code looks too well engineered for a simple oversight
It's a well known fact that Google has been doing this for a while now. Overall they just make the experience artificially a little worse if your user agent is Firefox, and apparently this is especially noticeable in UA-cam creator tools according to a video I watched like 2-3 years ago.
I saw this coming down the pipe over a decade ago. Too much success and cornering of the market happening with google. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
its not any kind of fact. the sorce is trust me bro and reddit why are Gen Z mindless sheep
war on linux
@@MauseDays the video I watched those years ago actually demonstrated it by using both Firefox and Chrome. I forget the exact issue it showed but when the user agent in Firefox was spoofed to say "Google Chrome" the issue disappeared, when the user agent in Chrome was spoofed to say "Firefox" the issue appeared again, even in their own browser. I guess you could fake such a video but what purpose would that have?
Do you think Google is above doing such a thing when it's common practice in many industries to make the user experience worse in order to get said user to adopt a different product? For instance phone manufacturers purposefully slow down older devices (as admitted to by Apple).
"Experimental feature" is just another way to say, future implementation by google
"Sir, the test feature report is here! Take a lo-"
"Just merge that shit already."
Not always, they sometimes killing experimental features.
But still I changed to other chromium based browsers.
I got those messages about UA-cam stopping my access unless I removed the ad-blocker, so what I do is make a note of the ads that interfere with my viewing, and if anybody asks for my opinion I send them to another company, eg I got interrupted by a Saker mini chainsaw ad, so when I needed to replace my mini chain saw I bought an Aprotii and now recommend them.
I had been experiencing this too but I figured it was just adblocker battling youtube. Never thought they'd go this far just to mess with Firefox.
"Blocked on this page, 456 elements". That's why YT is doing this, uBlock has gotten in the way of so much tracking data collection and ad serving.. Even just switching tabs and back ads 8 blocked elements to the counter. What the hell is YT trying to measure/store/report home about me switching back to a tab? I don't know, but I don't want it. But that has to be why, Firefox supports Ublock, and Alphabet hates not having full control.
@@bararobberbaron859 holy shit, so after reading this i for shits and giggles tabbed out and back in and saw my ublock origin jump from 108 blocked elements to 115
I think it's been doing this to me as well. Literally the only extension I have on firefox is one which lets me translate webpages. Absolutely ridiculous. I don't always like the EU, but I do love it when they force big companies to be a little less evil, and hope they will clobber google over this nonsense.
Mass dillusuion. there is no facts here. just mindless mob dillusions the source for this info is trust me bro and reddit why are Gen Z mindless sheep
I switched to Firefox a couple weeks ago and have been having this problem where every webpage works fine except UA-cam which just keeps loading until it times out. It normally fixes itself after 5 minutes and it only happens when I first open the browser.
Really weird and shady stuff. Hope these EU crackdowns can stop the over reach of big tech
Heck yeah the EU’s gonna mop the floor with them
It doesn't matter what browser I use...UA-cam starts off at OK speed, then everything starts slowing down after a bit of use to the point that it's virtually unusable . I don't know what's going on, but it's f%%%%ing annoying.
Here's something funny, if you don´t have an adblocker on Firefox, it pauses playback at the ad right away so it seems like it buffers but after a while you realize it isn't even buffering. It's insane.
seems like a bug more than anything
I don’t have ad block installed and sometimes it skips loading the ad, I thought it was because my pc is old and slow
There was also a de-optimizer they used another time where there was a transparent DIV element that would cause *ahem* other browsing applications to use a lot more processing power to show the page and have reduced performance/efficiency.
This move is evil to all planet, increasing computation, emissions and making our Lives miserable .0001% at a time. But actually, i wonder if such practice could be measured in environment impact
It's disgusting when they slowing down other browser when at the same time they claiming Chrome is very efficient and optimized
It is straight up a very strong anti competitive behavior that is not allowed in some countries (including EU)
I remember that one, so this latest move didn't surprise me
What makes me mad isn’t this, its the YT programmers that accept, probably large amounts of money, to make this happen, for the expense of a free and open web.. with great power comes great responsibility..
Terrible take. Not every developer bootlicks the company they work for. It’s either they do this or get fired and struggle to find a new job.
@@zephyr_kev I did ignore this comment for a while but it didn’t sit well with me.. what are you saying exactly? This very particular issue is why dictatorships like China and North Korea exist.. Sacrifice is an important part of life, thats why people ( and his creator) admire Edward Snowden.. Developers shouldn’t compromise on their principles, hopefully if they have any, not even a little bit..
UA-cam already seems to have a lot of bugs on Firefox: randomly skipping forward ten seconds, refusing to load the videos sometimes, having the video freeze while the audio continues, etc
So I'm not surprised if they start intentionally sabotaging their experience on this browser
Haven't ran into any of the issues you described on firefox ever.
i think u just have a buggy internet lol
What version of Firefox are you using and on what hardware? Those are some seriously annoying issues, but I think they may be specific to your situation.
@@Adept_Austin They are maybe. I don't believe it's a connexion problem (especially the skipping forward), so I'll have to look deeper at the issues
I've only ever had these problems on mobile Firefox, not PC.
the more shit like this happens the more and more imconvinced we need to anti-trust laws put in place for companies like google, who while they dont have a monopoly they might as well with how huge they are and how far reaching they have become across the internet
let the most powerful, corrupt, and manipulable group make more laws. doesnt work, didnt work, dont work. so long as there arent any morals and values, government and anyone who plays their game to get ahead will always be stupid and evil. the system was designed on the basis of war; peace is just the time between wars, not a separate thing with a good base that can understand and nourish the universality of morals and values to eventually fix problems for good instead of doing patch jobs. tens of thousands of years and nothing has changed. trusting the government to make decisions for you is like trusting an abusive father- youll make the same bad decisions he did and repeat history
monopoly is 33% of marketshare or more iiirc
@@De_Klapperkoning if thats the case i might be thinking to literal with the word monopoly
There hasn't been a single anti-trust lawsuit in the US since the 20th century, with the last one being Microsoft who won by a mistrial
exept theres no proof this is actualy happening. Tik tok is not a source. youtube is not a sorce reddit is barely a sorce.
This is where we all have to do everything possible to support FireFox. Haven't donated before, have now...twice. They are unsung heroes for sure.
if you want to help Firefox, the most valuable thing you can do is force Google to delete all your data, block all of their data collection, and never use any corporately curated feeds like trending or the recommended on the right. Use only your subscription feeds and click through on those channels.
It's not Google making these decisions. It's your behavior dictating them. You have to change YOUR behavior online and take responsibility for what you give your attention to, what data you share, and how these services evolve over time.
I wouldn't go THAT far... firefox pushes politics heavily in its news and has publicly pledged its support to "reduce" misinformation... despite that a lot of what it endorses is actually misinformation and disinformation. They then chose to endorse the duckduckgo search engine, which does the same. While it might be a smaller scale than what google, microsoft, facebook, twitter, etc did... both are still endorsing lies in order to favor political views
YES!
@@FluffySylveonBoi firefox is currently endorsing censorship of the internet...
@@ZennExileThat would actually be counterproductive, cause Google is one of the biggest funders of Firefox. It does it so there is competition in market and Google doesn't get sued for chrome dominating web browser market. Also Google pays Mozilla to make Google search the default search engine. If Google stops paying Mozilla, Firefox is a dead browser.
I run Firefox in Fedora Linux and this crap has been causing me all kinds of problems on top of the 5 second delay the last few days. Videos that won't play. Videos that just buffer endlessly. Videos that need a couple of refreshes to start, Videos that stop halfway through and WILL NOT get going again. So soon after the adblocker controversy just makes it look more sinister.
The saddest part about this is that since UA-cam is a monopoly (since they have virtually no competition) they can get away with crap like this.
We should create a UA-cam alternative
@@wildgunman6430 I've been using rumble for some time now, clearly not the same since most creators are still in youtube, but it's a much better experience overall
@@wildgunman6430 there is tons of alternatives.
The problem is the cost, always, google is like amazon, in terms of CPU and storage.
The moment an alternative begins to rise, if it doesn't have good infrastructure to handle millions like google, the website would pretty much just not be able to hold it for long.
Rumble
@@wildgunman6430 Odysee, Daily Motion, Vimeo, plenty of alternatives exist. But most people continue to prefer to suckle the UA-cam teat.
Chromium is open source. Brave is a fork that is modified from base Chromium. Brave has stated that they will not be removing Manifest V2 compatibility with their browser.
What's the point in doing that? They have their own adblocker built-in and don't have their own extensions store, so nobody will need v2 blockers and won't be able to install them.
Many people who use Brave still use uBlock since uBlock has features that Brave's adblock doesn't, like being able to hide any element of a website. At least, that's why I use uBlock on Brave.
Brave is nothing else but a joke of a browser. If they really cared, they'd have used a FF base
@@ApurvJyotirmay Let me guess, you don't like the Brave rewards stuff even though it's disabled by default?
@@user-og6hl6lv7p Brave's adblock just never works as well as ublock origin.
I'm using Chrome and I refuse to give up Adblock so UA-cam can be as salty as it wants.
I'm not giving in.
Not only have I experienced this on my Firefox browser, It was happening on my Opera GX browser also. It was happening so often I installed another browser just for UA-cam.
Delete opera gx asap bro
@@swiftsilver what's the deal with it? fed backdoor?
@@tanostrelok2323 look up opera gx rentry it explains everything
Happens on Brave too.
@@tanostrelok2323 Owned by China(a.k.a. the CCP)
I am an EU citizen myself, and its quite likely the EU is gonna do something about this. But, I do find it both sad and ridiculous that trust in american politicians by american citizens is so low, that american citizens need to rely on a foreign power to regulate companies from america, instead of you know, american politicians doing that.
I don't even trust the EU to do that. How is the EU going to handle the USB-C mandate in 10-20 years when that standard becomes outdated and we need something new? Governments aren't known for keeping up to date very well. And even if they do update, then by that time, there could be lobbyists entrenched in the system whispering in legislator's ears to make *their* special standard the new universal standard, rather than whatever is highest quality.
Given how much Alphabet invests into lobbying and maintaining government favoritism, among all the other corporations which do so, I'm convinced that "regulations" have actually helped corporations into these corrupt positions, rather than holding them back. I think the people are more heavily regulated than corporations, because corporations will inevitably have the biggest say in regulation.
With often actualization of a certain addons mentioned in this video you will be good and dandy. Ther are some peoples in this world that set goal to fight against commercials, so we should be thankful for them, without them we would drown in commercials madness.
As I keep saying: We live in the era where corporations treat users as an enemy and governments treat their population as criminals. The good news is that openly treating the very people you're supposed to work for as pests and looking for every way you can think of to attack ordinary people is a guaranteed way to be destroyed as a service / regime. Something Google and most regimes respectively have coming their way for a long time now, and believe me it won't be pretty once the full consequences come knocking.
Holy crap dude, you are a lifesaver. I knew that something funny was going on with my browser, but thanks to you I finally know what it was.
The entirety of UA-cam lags like crazy (as if we're browsing in 2008 with dial up) and plays videos slow af altogether in Firefox for me
Hmm...well that's Interesting. Internet Pirates 🏴☠
yarr harr!
damn, they did this on the client side with JS? are you kidding? they could have done this server-side and the only evidence we'd have would be people manually doing benchmarks with user agent spoofers, and Google could just say be like "sucks to suck" and continue to do sus stuff on the backend instead of being exposed like this lol
That junior dev probably read this and thought “oh good idea” and will do it next time lol
@@classicrockonlyand the sênior lawyer must to be thinging 'ahn interesting. Fellas we already has a alibi.'
I feel like we're actually witnessing a company ruin themselves through greed. Not only will the EU and USA probably crack down on this but any and all trust many users had with Google is lost now almost like an attempt at corporate suicide
This.
We're at war and Google is on the losing side.
Welcome to capitalism y’all
nuh-uh, never forget the "People are stupid" clause
They know what they’re doing, when companies get too big to fail they deliberately test just how far they can get away with things. Notice how they’ve been constantly removing useful features and basically every service from every company is getting worse? Yeah same thing.
they wont be ruined, just like any greedy corp, it changes the behavior of people cause theyre sheep
Opera GX user here. I ditched Chrome after it had an issue with my OS (Windows 7 Ultimate) and some anti-QoL updates.
Special thanks to the google devs that clearly did an intentionally bad job of implementing this so that it can be circumvented for as long as possible.
I'm afraid it's more likely to unintentional - any half-baked ex-script kiddie can write bloatware. Take a look at most source code - tons of bloatware.
@@JohnSmith-f2o True. The UA-cam recommendations algorithm is so brain dead that I have trouble believing top notch software designers wrote it.
The problem I've had with Google and UA-cam using Firefox for about the past 2 months is it will occasionally lag for a very long amount of time whenever I search something. This also seems to apply to other websites that use Google's search system.
Totally agree, this behavior is unacceptable. However, you do realize it’s not auto-reloading the page after 1 second of playback. The original recorder of the video is pressing Ctrl-R. The issue is the 5 seconds of artificial load time each time the page is loaded. Still a massive issue, and something Google should not be allowed to do (anti-trust, etc)
It's crazy to me that the subreddt r/youtube tells people that they aren't an official youtube subreddit and youtube isn't involved with the subreddit at all but then they remove posts that doesn't fit their agenda.
In one of the Frances Haugen (Facebook whistleblower/Head of Safety) interviews (the Rich Roll one, I think?), she mentions a study or something that showed that artificially slowing a service can be used to discourage someone from using it without them knowing.
She described a potential system for Facebook where a parent would set a child's bedtime, and their app would artificially slow down loading times for an hour or two before that time. So yeah, tech companies are definitely playing with the idea of manipulating loading times to modify user behaviour to patch over how their notification systems modified user behaviour.
Also, UA-cam doing shady shit around December time is so predictable it's basically tradition at this point.
Ahh, how I long for the days of Net Neutrality.