The NewPipe project recently had a few debates on advertising, its ethics and how Team NewPipe decides whether or not a certain form of advertising is acceptable. In this article, we present our position on advertising in general, show the difference between ethical and unethical advertising, and explain why we do not intend to support technologies like SponsorBlock.
I would be down for donating to content creators on Liberapay. The only thing I’m worried about is the legal status of “free videos”. To my knowledge most creators aren’t licensing their videos with CC etc. What rights do you actually hold over a youtube video for example?
Apparently Youtube allows authors to distribute CC-BY licensed videos on their platform. The lack of Share Alike clause is unfortunate but I suppose it’s better than nothing.
I don’t agree with this position but I also don’t agree with the attacks against them for having this position. It’s not “pathetic” that they don’t implement features you want. The point of free (libre) software is that you don’t have to share the position of the upstream developers, as you can make a fork that has the features you want. That is what has happened with NewPipe.
Worst of all, driving people away from official releases puts them more at risk of downloading malware, and wastes the time of developers. By all means turn it off by default, but refusing to include a feature IS an anti-feature.
Unfortunate. I really wish that content creators would create pages on Patreon or Liberapay and just see how many people would financially support their content. If the Patreon model works in keeping political commentary and tech-focussed channels up, I don’t see how it would be any different for channels making other kinds of content.
My opinion on Sponsorblock is mixed. I like the idea that content creators have the freedom to choose who they can partner with, but at the same time I really hate having to see companies like Hello Fresh all the time knowing how they treat their workers, or other sponsors like GFuel where it takes a stupid amount of effort to get them to stop sponsoring terrible people.
BTW, I just mentioned it as the fork the provided blog URL talks about. I’m concerned with the direction it might take, since several ex Vanced users are pushing for getting to login to youtube, as Vanced did:
Oh jeez that’s a shame. It at least makes me feel better about not being on Android anymore…I missed NewPipe, but if it holds a weak stance like that as a project then I’d rather use something better anyway.
As the reply here said: The absolute statement is completely wrong, since hearing of a product from someone else, even a friend, is advertising. Talking positevely about a movie, tv show can be seen as advertising that show. Seeing an ad that is not targeted is also ok. And finally people need to eat and earn money on the internet, either you sell a product (which needs advertising) or you are the person who does that promo or advert. Not everyone can live off Of Patreon or Donations.
And finally people need to eat and earn money on the internet, either you sell a product (which needs advertising) or you are the person who does that promo or advert.
Ignoring the nitpicking of what “advertising” means, no they don’t. The internet doesn’t have to be an avenue for people to make money. You may prefer that to be the case, but it is not an absolute requirement. Personally, I would prefer this ad-driven web collapse entirely so that the only web pages are small sustainable passion projects.
Advertising that sticks to accurate facts (free of exaggeration and lies), and is displayed only based on what you’re currently looking at (not a profile created from your past behaviour) seems pretty ethical to me
I disagree.
So, back when I used to watch commercial TV broadcasts, I was being immoral because I avoided all ads by watching something else or just going to bathroom in the meanwhile?
Ads are brainwashing, it doesn’t matter in which form they come. So I’ll do whatever I can do avoid them.
No they didn’t. Not bothering to implement it because you don’t believe it’s important? Fine. Throwing away the work someone else has done for you? Pathetic.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !technology@lemmy.ml
Subscribe to see more stories about technology on your homepage
I would be down for donating to content creators on Liberapay. The only thing I’m worried about is the legal status of “free videos”. To my knowledge most creators aren’t licensing their videos with CC etc. What rights do you actually hold over a youtube video for example?
Apparently Youtube allows authors to distribute CC-BY licensed videos on their platform. The lack of Share Alike clause is unfortunate but I suppose it’s better than nothing.
Source: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2797468?hl=en
I don’t agree with this position but I also don’t agree with the attacks against them for having this position. It’s not “pathetic” that they don’t implement features you want. The point of free (libre) software is that you don’t have to share the position of the upstream developers, as you can make a fork that has the features you want. That is what has happened with NewPipe.
I thought the same thing.
removed by mod
Worst of all, driving people away from official releases puts them more at risk of downloading malware, and wastes the time of developers. By all means turn it off by default, but refusing to include a feature IS an anti-feature.
They can have their beliefs, but once it’s available I’ll be switching straight over to the sponsorblock-enabled version thank you very much
People already made a fork, search Newpipe Sponsorblock
keep in mind, that fork author is investigating how to enable google login, pushed with requests from ex Vanced users… See my comment about it below:
https://lemmy.ml/post/232317/comment/160728
Unfortunate. I really wish that content creators would create pages on Patreon or Liberapay and just see how many people would financially support their content. If the Patreon model works in keeping political commentary and tech-focussed channels up, I don’t see how it would be any different for channels making other kinds of content.
My opinion on Sponsorblock is mixed. I like the idea that content creators have the freedom to choose who they can partner with, but at the same time I really hate having to see companies like Hello Fresh all the time knowing how they treat their workers, or other sponsors like GFuel where it takes a stupid amount of effort to get them to stop sponsoring terrible people.
FYI: https://github.com/polymorphicshade/NewPipe
They’re deciding on the fork name still, to then, have a fdroid repo I’d guess. It already supports notification updates:
https://github.com/polymorphicshade/NewPipe/issues/14#issuecomment-748393890
BTW, I just mentioned it as the fork the provided blog URL talks about. I’m concerned with the direction it might take, since several ex Vanced users are pushing for getting to login to youtube, as Vanced did:
https://github.com/polymorphicshade/NewPipe/discussions/164#discussioncomment-2577669
And it seems their requests will be heard at some point:
https://github.com/polymorphicshade/NewPipe/discussions/164#discussioncomment-2415244 https://github.com/polymorphicshade/NewPipe/discussions/164#discussioncomment-2456960
So, not sponsoring polymorphic newpipe. If only it remained as newpipe with sponsorblock…
I felt I needed to provide additional information about polymorphic newpipe, :)
We could always fork a specific commit of the NewPipe SponsorBlock project.
A fork to the fork, which sync with the original repo, :) You’re right of course, just wanted to have some fun about it, :)
Oh jeez that’s a shame. It at least makes me feel better about not being on Android anymore…I missed NewPipe, but if it holds a weak stance like that as a project then I’d rather use something better anyway.
There is no ethical advertising.
As the reply here said: The absolute statement is completely wrong, since hearing of a product from someone else, even a friend, is advertising. Talking positevely about a movie, tv show can be seen as advertising that show. Seeing an ad that is not targeted is also ok. And finally people need to eat and earn money on the internet, either you sell a product (which needs advertising) or you are the person who does that promo or advert. Not everyone can live off Of Patreon or Donations.
Ignoring the nitpicking of what “advertising” means, no they don’t. The internet doesn’t have to be an avenue for people to make money. You may prefer that to be the case, but it is not an absolute requirement. Personally, I would prefer this ad-driven web collapse entirely so that the only web pages are small sustainable passion projects.
I disagree with the absolute statement there
Advertising that sticks to accurate facts (free of exaggeration and lies), and is displayed only based on what you’re currently looking at (not a profile created from your past behaviour) seems pretty ethical to me
I disagree. So, back when I used to watch commercial TV broadcasts, I was being immoral because I avoided all ads by watching something else or just going to bathroom in the meanwhile? Ads are brainwashing, it doesn’t matter in which form they come. So I’ll do whatever I can do avoid them.
deleted by creator
No they didn’t. Not bothering to implement it because you don’t believe it’s important? Fine. Throwing away the work someone else has done for you? Pathetic.
deleted by creator
Sure, it’s up to them at the end of the day, but I can still explain why I think it’s a terrible decision
Then why is it a terrible decision?