Yeah, but I don’t know whether you’ve recently taken a look in one of the local newspapers— being able to select topics you want to read about may very well be worth the extra effort (also, fun of course)

YouTube is/ its ads are are extremely privacy intrusive and there isn’t really an alternative to the platform. Next to the comparatively obvious network effects all social media platforms rely on is also because YouTube on its own is not that profitable and probably only really makes Google money via the data collected on the platform. This means only platforms that have a gigantic ad network themselves and are able to monetize said data as well as Google can can actually compete with YouTube— and as you see, there are basically none.

Also, the whole blocking ad blockers thing is trying to fundamentally reverse the power equilibrium between the website (the server) and the person visiting it (the client); because for the last 40 years or so, the server had the purpose of delivering content to the client which could decide what to do with and how to present said content. This sharing of responsibility between the two comes in many forms, starting with simple things such as screen readers or a reading mode for the browser.

This is not necessarily the case.

You could only use this new system if the old one fails, ie. only for the say 10% of users that block ads, and so even if it were more expensive it would still be more profitable than letting them block all ads.

But I don’t think even that is the case, as they can essentially just “swap out” the video they’re streaming (as they don’t really stream “one video” per video anyway), bringing additional running costs to nearly zero.

The only thing definitely more expensive and resource intensive is the development of said custom software

Interesting, that seems to be the reason for most. Under which circumstances if any would you upvote a perceived advertisement?

Would you upvote a well written advertisement that you think makes the company’s intention very clear to the reader? Would you do so if the intention not only sounded realistic, but also like they want to achieve something net-positive?

Or is it really just being an advertisement that makes you downvote?

Yeah, I don’t agree with the conclusion (like at all), but I still found the first 3/4 of the article very nicely put and definitely worth reading.

Why are there so many downvotes on this?

Logseq, it’s a lot like Obsidian as it also has knowledge graphs, tags, is markdown-based and self-hostable but, in contrast to Obsidian, it’s fully open source

I think the latter makes clear that this is a joke account, doesn’t it?

The reason is in fact not only because of this exact symbol, but because people tried to change program’s behavior in a malicious way by replacing legitimate code with same looking symbols.