• KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    this is all bullshit btw, it won’t do anything for thirdparty clients and yt-dlp for example.

    This is because blocking is entirely client side now, with no way of youtube determining whether or not its happened at all.

    • Wispy2891@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      5 months ago

      They’re testing to embed the ads in the stream and not the usual switch to a different video

      It definitely affects third party client if now they get a file of a video that now has 30 seconds of ad content at the beginning

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        it won’t though, because you can just remove that 30 seconds at the beginning, which is almost definitely going to be very different than the rest of the video in a number of ways. Notably, there are likely going to be UI differences during and after ads play, as well as video playback alterations. Ad’s aren’t going to be the same quality as video itself.

        It’s possible that they’re transcoding them into the video itself, but doing that would be catastrophically bad and have such a massive cost that it simply would not be worthwhile.

        • MrWildBunnycat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          ·
          5 months ago

          They are transcoding them into the video. Sponsorblock had to make a quick change to discard submissions from users that have been identified to be on this trial system, because it affects the video length, and as such - makes it impossible to have consistent segments

          • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            i highly doubt it. I would think they’re probably doing some UDP packet voodoo bullshit.

            Though it likely appears as transcoded.

            The sheer cost of them being transcoded into videos is immense, even if they’re live encoding every video.

            What happens when you get an ad you need to takedown and remove? You’re on disk transcode is suddenly useless now, and you need to make a new one, easy enough, you can just do that in the background, but this also means your ads are baked into each video, which is less than ideal, unless you’re constantly updating them.

            And if you’re doing live transcodes, that means that you have to do this for every view on every video, and i’m not sure that’s sustainable.

            I suppose you could probably do a cached live transcode system to bring down the overhead, but i can’t imagine it’s easier than just pulling some voodoo networking bullshit to literally inject an advertisement.