• Cortius@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      10 months ago

      Why is it a bad decision? It’s the same cost as Spotify, but I get ad free videos. I don’t get this line of thinking…

      • arudesalad@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        10 months ago

        It also supports the creators of the video as well. If I had the money I would choose premium over an adblocker just because of that.

        • namingthingsiseasy@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          Why is it your responsibility to pay the creators? Google is a trillion dollar company and makes billions off of what people post on youtube. Shouldn’t they be paying them instead and not you?

          Besides, it’s only a matter of time before Google takes more and more of the cut that you think you’re paying them.

          • snowe@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            10 months ago

            Your logic doesn’t make any sense. They make money off of people paying for a service or watching ads. If you’re blocking ads then you’re costing Google money and no creators are getting paid. If you’re paying for the service then you don’t get ads, and you pay the creators, and you pay for Google to keep running the service.

          • diffcalculus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            10 months ago

            Lmao… Amazing logic.

            YouTube makes enough money to pay creators so you don’t have to.

            Ok, how do you think YouTube makes money?

            Error. Division by zero detected