I mean technically, if you get blocked, you say that’s BS! I don’t even know what an ad blocker is! And it turns out your son installed it because you shouldn’t let sites in your browser without protection, you’ve felt you were falsely accused, but the accusation wasn’t false.

It could also be read as you feel your falsely accused, and it turns out Google had a bug, you were falsely accused, and you also felt that you were.

This entire thing is being done in an extremely hostile way though… They teach you to use clear, concise, neutral, and non-accusatory language as part of UX best practices. The proper message would be “if you feel this is in error”.

Instead of cutting the video until you turn off your ad blocker (as is the standard and looks a lot better if you), they’re using threatening sounding language and putting it in press releases. Instead of neutral terms, they’re using legalese. Instead of saying you should remove unlock because ad blockers can cause problems (which is technically true, if very misleading), they’re giving people messages saying that it slows down your browser, which is entirely untrue - blocking a dozen requests is cheaper than sending one and reading the response, let alone rendering the ad. The only way it slows down your browser is if chrome sees it in your add ons and starts Bitcoin mining in the background

The whole thing is very strange, especially since historically Google has been pretty delicate with the issue. They’ve blocked the video if the ads don’t show a few times, but quickly backed off when people made a fuss.

They also have been signaling “were going to push ad blockers off chrome” for like a year now, they announced this basically when they started doing it

I guess it’s a new age, where tech companies have given up on even pretending they respect us

The second Internet is dying, long live the fediverse