Ask HN: Googlers, Will Google Disable Accounts for Using Adblockers on YouTube?
I use adblockers. My YouTube experience is pretty clean.
But I got the pop-up this morning saying that adblockers are not allowed on YouTube. Fair enough.
But it got me wondering: would Google go so far as to disable accounts that do this? Losing access to my Google account would be bad, even though I have degoogled as much as possible.
If Google would do this, I think I'll stop YouTube, which is fine too; my account is just too critical at this point. I would love if it weren't.
So Googlers, whether speaking for yourself and giving your own opinion, or officially, would Google do that?
For everyone else, would it even be legal for Google to do that? Why or why not?
58 comments
[ 3.6 ms ] story [ 121 ms ] thread...But Google still probably doesn't care. I suspect the population of YouTube adblockers is big enough for them to care about the lost revenue, but not a big enough fraction of the general population to create PR issues or to lose revenue from smurfing.
How many people would actually stop using them due to the backlash? On Google's scale, it wouldn't even show on their usage stats.
Additionally they have bigger PR disasters than that happening practically every week.
The only reason Google would care was if such a move caused a $1B+ sanction from a Government somewhere on the planet. AdBlocker use is not a legally protected right, so there are no sanctions coming.
Personally I think it's unlikely Google would disable accounts for that. They're more likely to work around it.
It is possible adblockers officially became mainstream. Part of me ia happy about it. Part of me is concerned companies will respond in the worst possible way.
I don't think it's a good business decision, but there's an angle.
Don't you think we're far past the era where this was a reason not to do something? The "break stuff, 4d chess enthusiasts will explain why later" mentality seems to have permeated product design.
Thinking of the loss of the headphone jack (objectively proven to have nothing to do with space-saving), the continuous killing of Google features, the rise of paid 'verification', the to-and-fro wins and loses in right to repair, looming loss of the ability to 'block' on Twitter (most Twitter updates post-Musk) - anti-features feel like a thing to be rationalised and waived off in 2023.
I am totally stealing this to explain every instance of product crapware I can find on the internet.
That's what I wound up doing; each Google account has it's own container. For most of my browsing, the only thing logged in is Kagi.
That said, it doesn't make a lot of sense. If you have an adblocker on one device, but not others, why drop your account when they could push you to use the device they like you to use?
Especially since, despite the popup saying it won't work, video playback still works as of earlier this week when I saw it.
For all the stepping in the EU has been doing lately, I'd rather they focus on something like this before making me replace all my Lightning chargers with USB-C ones
Edit: I've also heard that they are starting, or will start, to force Premium users to watch ads.
With YouTube I have zero confidence that the authors get a fair share, and the last thing I want is to give money to the parasites randomly claiming copyright (and stealing the money) over other people's work.
They will probably block video though.
My guess is at some point they show a message like you need to get a youtube premium subscription to keep watching without ads. Same with some news sites now which ask that you subscribe if you are blocking ads.
We tech bros can hold on to a grudge forever.
Genz doesn't care about reddit. Neither does the next gen after them. It's dead.
I know it's fun to think you're the centre of the universe while you're the age you are, but Facebook, Reddit — hell even _T.V._ in some form — will all be still around well after your generation is being told _you're_ irrelevant by the new kids.
Then yahoo.
I don't like Google, but I still use it
I absolutely refuse to use Sony, and Debian. And actively discourage both recommending alternatives. I can easily add more to that list :)
1. No Googler here knows the answer to your question, because something this big is decided way up the chain. Furthermore, due to the huge backlash for such a move, I assume most Googlers would be against such a move, so it will only come to pass if forced by top management.
2. Your account is worth more to Google when you are using it, since they can better target ads at you, so disabling an account is something they want to avoid. I'm guessing they don't think it is profitable for them to disable an account that blocks ads on YT. Remember that even if you are blocking ads on YT, you might still see Google Ads elsewhere, for example on your Android device. They might just not show you the videos though?
Not in my experience. Not even remotely true. Nobody above the level of the team of ICs writing the account abuse rules knows how it works or why. Not their manager, certainly not their director, undoubtedly not their VP or SVP. The team would have OKRs around high-level account abuse outcomes such as known stolen accounts, lockout false/true positive rates, etc.