SponsorBlock (and DeArrow) - Lemmy.World
lemmy.world
Community for SponsorBlock (and DeArrow): SponsorBlock is a crowdsourced extension to skip sponsor segments in YouTube videos. DeArrow is a crowdsourced extension to replace titles and thumbnails on YouTube videos with more accuracy and less sensationalism. — SponsorBlock is an open-source crowdsourced browser extension and open API for skipping sponsor segments in YouTube videos. Users submit when a sponsor happens from the extension, and the extension automatically skips sponsors it knows about using a privacy preserving query system. It also supports skipping other categories, such as intros, outros and reminders to subscribe, and skipping to the point with highlight. The source code is fully open and the database can be downloaded by anyone. I want to keep this as open as possible! You can view the docs for the public API or host a mirror. — Links: - status.sponsor.ajay.app - sponsor.ajay.app/ - sponsor.ajay.app/news - dearrow.ajay.app/ - x.com/SponsorBlock [http://x.com/SponsorBlock] - fosstodon.org/@sponsorblock [http://fosstodon.org/@sponsorblock] - Created by Ajay Ramachandran: ajay.app/ - Logo by @munadikieh: github.com/munadikieh [http://github.com/munadikieh]

Link:

  1. lemmy.world/c/sponsorblock
  2. [email protected]

SponsorBlock is an open-source crowdsourced browser extension and open API for skipping sponsor segments in YouTube videos. Users submit when a sponsor happens from the extension, and the extension automatically skips sponsors it knows about using a privacy preserving query system. It also supports skipping other categories, such as intros, outros and reminders to subscribe, and skipping to the point with highlight.

The source code is fully open and the database can be downloaded by anyone. I want to keep this as open as possible! You can view the docs for the public API or host a mirror.

  • dwindling7373@feddit.itEnglish
    1019·
    2 months ago

    Daily reminder that SponsorBlock, unlike adiacent solutions (Like AdBlocks for example) is not necessarily “good”.

    Explicit sponsorship inside a video is considered to be one of a few good solution to the issue of content creators being naturally subjected to death by starvation.

    • Limfjorden@feddit.dkEnglish
      141·
      2 months ago

      Explicit sponsorship inside a video is considered to be one of a few good solution to the issue of content creators being naturally subjected to death by starvation.

      It’s better on the issue of tracking, but if one is just an opponent of ads in general, there is no difference.

      I would rather pay someone than watch ads (which I do if I watch their content regularly). I subscribe to Nebula, where a lot of the creators I watch post their videos. I also support some through Patreon. I wish there was a way to pay for just a single video, since some creators only occasionally produce videos I want to watch.

      Ads promote overconsumption, and I don’t think anyone should be forced to see them, unless they want to. Also, the sponsors are always the same 10 shitty companies (Betterhelp, Raid Shadow Legends, NordVPN…). I don’t care for these companies, so why should I be forced to watch ads for them?

      • dwindling7373@feddit.itEnglish
        5·
        2 months ago

        I wish there was a way to pay for just a single video

        There totally is, just send them a low amount of money or do the hwole Youtube Premium thing.

    • jimmydoreisalefty@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      164·
      2 months ago

      IMO: Ads are ads, even if they come from the creator themselves.

      People will support them if they can and if they want to.

      Many ways to support them, direct funding, talking about them, making communities, and other stuff.

      • dwindling7373@feddit.itEnglish
        72·
        2 months ago

        That’s not your opinion. Ads are, indeed, ads.

        Not all ads are invasive soul seeking tracking nightmares and no, there are not “many ways” for content creators to do that full-time.

        • jimmydoreisalefty@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
          66·
          2 months ago

          That’s not your opinion.

          Okay.

          Not all ads are invasive soul seeking tracking nightmares

          Ads are ads; it doesn’t matter if they are “good” or “bad,” unless you want to watch them like most people do because they don’t mind or they don’t know how to block them.

          no, there are not “many ways” for content creators to do that full-time.

          If they do not get the engagement or funds they need, they will either paywall or find other ways to support themselves; or they will just not make it on YouTube or streaming, like many people before them, unless they continue to fight on while learning and failling.

          This reminds me of some small business talks; it is a harsh capitalistic world; you give up or keep trying.

          I still say grassroots funding and support is the way to go if they are just doing it for the hobby or for what they believe.

            • jimmydoreisalefty@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
              56·
              2 months ago

              TIL, cool for them.

              I use other YT forks and systems that already implement similar techniques even if they are “good” or “bad” ads.

              I am also for Sailing the High Seas.

              We have a difference in opinion on this matter, but thanks for the small chat and the link!

              This is the section you are talking about:

              SponsorBlock

              This year, a developer worked on implementing support for SponsorBlock in NewPipe. SponsorBlock is a crowd-sourced database listing sponsored sections in videos, which are automatically skipped by clients such as web browsers, using extensions.

              While SponsorBlock’s implementation apparently takes care to preserve user privacy (you can, e.g., download the entire database for offline use, and its regular querying system is also well made), it targets an ethical advertising system. Its purpose is to help users, who probably don’t realise that sponsorship is one of the most ethical ways to fund their favorite content, automatically skip sponsored sections of videos.

              Morally, it’s a very questionable system. Of course, some sponsoring may be of little relevance to the user, or maybe even intrusive or hidden. But SponsorBlock doesn’t differentiate between ethical and unethical advertisements. It just skips all kinds of sponsored sections.

    • lime!@feddit.nuEnglish
      10·
      2 months ago

      advertising is emotional manipulation that i do not wish to be subjected to when not actively seeking it out. doesn’t matter if it’s done out of necessity, give me as a viewer a way to support you directly if that’s the situation.

        • lime!@feddit.nuEnglish
          81·
          2 months ago

          and i pay those people if i engage with their creations. i still get ads in their videos, so i use sponsorblock.

      • rglullis@communick.newsEnglish
        5·
        2 months ago

        Oh, I guess I’ll bite…

        If ads are not acceptable ever, please tell me how you think people should be supported.

        • Crowdfunding is not enough.
        • The culture is to reject any type of business, even when it’s a small mom-and-pop shop, or an indie dev.
        • Co-ops could work, but (usually) require some level of affinity between the members (e.g: people from the same geographical region or artists working on some specific style/school) or they require some rich benefactor to bootstrap the venture.

        Unless you are expecting people to just provide you free content forever, what do you suggest?

        • BaroqueInMind@lemmy.oneEnglish
          46·
          2 months ago

          You don’t see free open source platforms and software advertise everywhere, do you?

            • BaroqueInMind@lemmy.oneEnglish
              34·
              2 months ago

              The answer to your question is the implied answer you can gleam from my rhetorical reply by comparing how free open source platforms such as Wikipedia and Mozilla operate. If you had any reading comprehension or critical thinking skills you wouldn’t have needed to ask (hint: my non-sequitur implies I have a weak argument).

              • howrar@lemmy.caEnglish
                3·
                2 months ago

                The majority of Mozilla’s income comes from advertising for Google

    • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
      31·
      2 months ago

      Advertisement made YT a whoring fest where content does not matter and is only used to bait people into clicking your video so that the creators get money. That’s the primary purpose of YT nowadays, and it fucking sucks. I’m not gonna support that shit.

      • dwindling7373@feddit.itEnglish
        23·
        2 months ago

        My brother in Christ, being watched is the goal of any content creator, that’s unrelated to advertisements. Now Youtube ads are paid (lets simplify a bit) blindly once you click the video, it’s a metric, you see those if you want access to the video.

        If the content of the video has the guy saying “thanks xyz for sponsoring this raid shadow legends” that’s a contract between the guy doing the video and the sponsor, following metrics agreed between themselves, it has no ties with “the purpose of youtube” simply because… it’s not youtube.

        Will there be people doing cheap content to get “easy” sponsor money? Sure but if the content suck you won’t watch it. It’s a loss just like if the motetization was following any other driver (as long as the driver is… watching the thing rather than not).

        • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
          22·
          2 months ago

          it has no ties with “the purpose of youtube” simply because… it’s not youtube.

          It’s literally hosted and watched on YT my guy. Without YT the video would not exist, without YT the video would not be watched, without YT the video would not even get created, and without YT it would not give the creator any way to monetize it - be it through YT ads itself or through external third party sponsoring, which is ultimately completely irrelevant to your counter argument. In the end the videos get made with the purpose of making money off of them, not to provide a potentially interesting video to be shared with others - that’s how YT started.

          Sure but if the content suck you won’t watch it.

          I won’t, thousands or even millions of others do though, because the average user is about as brain dead as the content nowadays on YT.

          • dwindling7373@feddit.itEnglish
            3·
            2 months ago

            You have a problem with profits, mate, not with ads.

            I’m not disagreeing with you there, but also, I like the things I like to exist without waiting for the revolution.

            • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
              21·
              2 months ago

              I have a problem with content made for the purpose to profit. And no, I’m completely allergic to ads, so I very much have a problem with ads as a whole too. They’re just two correlating issues.