• Leg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      75
      ·
      6 months ago

      The term “attention theft” is some dystopian shit, and just probable enough to make me vomit in my mouth.

      • SSTF@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Attention theft is an existing term, though it’s used to describe bad practices by marketers. I suppose it’s bad that the term has had to come into existence, but it is good that it exists as a way to talk about bad practices more easily.

        • pkmkdz@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          (not) fun fact: In game design there exists analogical term for “making player addicted” called “dark patterns”. Mostly used by live service and mobile games

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Some insurance group put up a billboard on the route I use to go to work telling us how we all suffer from insurance fraud.

      Each and every time I went past it I would try to imagine how much I would have to hate a person in order to side with the enemy against them. No saint and I never pretended to be one but I still wouldn’t do that.

    • filcuk@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      42
      ·
      6 months ago

      When Vanced went down, and before ReVanced came out, I had stopped using YT. The ads are unbearable.
      So I know what I’d do.

    • NutWrench@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Yup. What YouTube doesn’t understand is that we’ve got ** other stuff to do.** I’ve got books to read, games to play, music to listen to. None of which requires YouTube.

      • Got_Bent@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        6 months ago

        I’ve found myself repatronizing half priced books lately. I’ve gone through five books since mid May.

        I was a voracious reader before mobile devices existed.

        I’d forgotten just how much more satisfying it is to let yourself go in a good story rather than bicker about minutiae with countless strangers all day every day.

        (Sidenote: I’ve been looking up reviews for the books I’ve read and am surprised to find indignation at sexual scenes in novels. Like, if you’ve ever read a John Irving novel in your life, and you’re surprised and offended that the next one has sex in it, you should maybe reconsider your chosen career path)

        • rwhitisissle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          surprised to find indignation at sexual scenes in novels

          To quote Ryan Letourneau, “Gen Z is Puritanpilled.” Seriously, I’ve found post-millennial generations to be extremely prudish. I think part of it has to do with the fact that as the internet evolved and became mainstream (and more profitable by catering to general audiences), the edgy or adult content became more ghetoized and quarantined over time. Used to be you’d go to reddit and there’d be porn on the front page. There’s like a 0% change of finding something NSFW on the front page there now. As such, younger people who grew up with the modern incarnation of the internet have a very different perspective on sexual content than those of us who grew up with a more “wild west” style internet where porn was just something that lived alongside the more mundane content. The side-effect of this is also that content like the John Irving novels you’re talking about are treated as if they’re grotesque for presenting sex as just another part of people’s lives - something that you’re not supposed to be shy about or ashamed of. Which is, uh…concerning, for a number of reasons. Other theories are that the world in which we live has eroded platonic relationships among young people and that they want to only see platonic friendships among characters, as that’s the vicarious experience they most desire.

    • Tixanou@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I found this on Twitter and didn’t know who made it, but thanks! They’re credited now :)

    • faceula@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      6 months ago

      Credit where it’s due indeed. This also reminds me of Black Mirror, I think it was season 1 with the talent show auditions.

    • xenoclast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      They may have had it past on through a billion people before they posted it here… Is the most likely answer.

      Thanks for sourcing it though!

    • medgremlin@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      6 months ago

      The image won’t load, but based on the replies, I think it’s a weeping angel, and now I don’t want the image to load.

    • pkmkdz@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      vr goggles have entered the chat

      for those that don’t know, in vr most apps to avoid motion sickness keeps player in it’s own “space”. Users can look away from virtual screen displaying content or text, just by turning their heads around. But, for example in games, when content is important (ex. story dialogue subtitles) the content is programmed to try to move in front of player’s view at all times, even if it’s obstructing rest of the virtual world

  • Delusional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    “There will now be a short questionnaire on the ad you watched to see if you actually listened to it. If you get below 90%, we will show two minutes of ads.”

    • broken_chatbot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      6 months ago

      A Russian video hosting Rutube (which was totally dead until the govt decided to detract Russians from using YouTube, which made the platform semi-dead) actually tried to do that, having a quiz after each ad break, asking questions such as “what TV channel has been advertised in this ad?” and repeating the ad video if answered wrong

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      “Why are you leaving? Fill out this survey and let us know what you didn’t like. Please enter your email. Before you go, 50% of YouTube Plus Ultimate!”

  • I remember there being some Android phone (some generation of Samsung Galaxy S series probably) with a “feature” where it pauses video playback if you look away from it. Good thing it didn’t catch on.

  • megopie@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    See, I have no doubt they would if they could, but i doubt such things are actually feasible.

    Like right now I just refresh the page to skip ads on my phone.

    • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      It’s entirely feasible.

      Amazon had full head tracking, including gaze, in the Fire Phone a decade ago.

        • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          It’s practically feasible, just not yet deemed profitable enough to do.

          Flying cars are not practically feasible.

          • megopie@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            It’s not practically feasible because people will find ways around it. The app can require an eye tracking features to be turned on, but people will go to the browser site. If they get the people making a browser to integrate it, then people will use another browser. They’d have to block access on any mobile browser that doesn’t enforce it, and that’s a futile effort.

            At least on IOS, they tried to lock Picture in Picture and background play behind a paywall, but that only worked in the app, and both features still work for the mobile site with a bit of fussing. Just because they implement restrictions and features doesn’t mean they can actually get them to work enough that people won’t glitch around them.

    • saltesc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      6 months ago

      They could.

      Default is 60s ad block. However, enabling ‘Regular User’ feature will bring this down to a more convenient 15s block so you get your content faster every time. To enable this feature, tap Allow when prompted for camera permissions.

    • Deello@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      I remember playing with a similar feature on my Galaxy S3 back in the day. Eye scrolling. The phone would scroll for you when it sensed you looking at the bottom of the screen. That was the S3. It was not perfect but very usable. My hands always felt faster so I never kept it on but it was a fun thing to play with. I’m sure the only thing stopping them is the fear of backlash. We’ll get there in time I’m sure :/

      • megopie@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        The tech exist but enforcing that people use it is another matter. They cannot even properly paywall Picture in Picture and background play on IOS.

  • CrowAirbrush@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    6 months ago

    I can’t be arsed to modify a gravestone with youtube logo on it, but that’s what it would look like to me if they pulled that off.

    Just bye, good luck.

    I’m already surprised how people fell into the short content trap/addiction loop. That in itself was a eye opener for me to take a step back.

    • Ibuthyr@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      That’s why I use Revanced. I can hide the shorts and news shelves. The former is disgustingly addictive and a massive waste of time, while the latter is plain Nazi propaganda at times.

    • Makeshift@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 months ago

      uBlock Origin has spoiled me by allowing me to erase the shorts listings. So I don’t even know how bad it is for shorts.

    • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yeah it’s a bit confronting to look at the alternative front ends like invidious or something and realise that there’s much less dopamine produced while looking for your stuff.

  • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Unrelated, but seeing “2025,” my first thought was “haha that’s so far in the future”. Jesus, for something that’s six months away, that’s a futuristic ass sounding date

  • nexussapphire@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    This will be the death of YouTube for me. I pay for YouTube premium so this day may never come for me.

    • youmaynotknow@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      6 months ago

      That didn’t keep Amazon from adding ads to the paid version of Prime and making a higher paid tier. How much easier is it for Google to implement the same?

      • Nine@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        6 months ago

        And when that happened I stoped watching prime and just put on my eye patch & tricorn 🏴‍☠️…

        Though I’m still paying for the content I just watch it differently than intended 🤷‍♂️

        • youmaynotknow@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Seeks like a bunch of us chose to do the same. These companies actually believe there is no end to what they think they’re entitled .

      • rwhitisissle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        6 months ago

        How much easier is it for Google to implement the same?

        The correct question is actually “when will Google implement the same?” Because this is a “when will it happen” question, not a “will it happen” question.

      • nexussapphire@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 months ago

        The biggest reason I pay for it is supposedly creators I watch get paid significantly more than someone who sits through ads without skipping. I also don’t really watch regular TV.

          • nexussapphire@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            6 months ago

            Yeah, I know it’s not an excuse but I’m lazy and this guarantees even the individuals I watch irregularly gets their share. I’ve heard it even pays out if it’s demonetized (don’t take my word on that one though.)

  • aeronmelon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    6 months ago

    People still running content blockers and piping video links in 2025: “You guys are still watching ads?”