Show HN: YouTube banned adblockers so I built an extension to skip their ads

Hacker News Discussion ↗

YouTube’s crackdown on ad blockers has prompted developers to build new browser extensions that speed through or mute ads instead of blocking them outright, aiming to appear compliant to YouTube’s scripts while still saving users’ time. Commenters report wildly different experiences depending on browser, account, and adblock configuration—some say uBlock Origin on Firefox still works flawlessly, others hit nag screens or playback blocks—highlighting a deliberate, evolving A/B test by Google. The thread broadens into debate over the ethics of adblocking versus paying for YouTube Premium, fears about future DRM-like controls on the web, and interest in alternative frontends and apps such as NewPipe, FreeTube, Piped, and SponsorBlock.

Adblock detection and user experiences

  • Many report YouTube still works fine with uBlock Origin (often on Firefox), with no warnings or ads.
  • Others see aggressive anti‑adblock behavior: modals, playback blocks after a few videos, or needing to repeatedly clear/update uBO filter lists.
  • Behavior seems cohort‑based: gradual, per‑account/browser A/B rollout, sometimes only when logged in. Some saw the popups briefly, then they vanished.
  • Some users note that if they use only uBO (no other blockers) or watch logged‑out/incognito, they avoid problems.

Extension’s approach and technical arms race

  • The showcased extension doesn’t block ads; it mutes the player and speeds through ad segments so YouTube “thinks” ads played.
  • Commenters like this as a harder‑to‑detect fallback: server sees full ad playback time, yet users don’t actually watch.
  • Others warn this will become a cat‑and‑mouse game: YouTube can detect playbackRate changes, delay main content until ad time elapses, or change DOM/CSS frequently.
  • Performance concerns: constant DOM observation and reliance on fragile CSS selectors could break with minor UI changes.

Alternatives and tools

  • Popular solutions mentioned:
    • uBlock Origin (often with manual “Quick Fixes” updates).
    • SponsorBlock for skipping creator‑embedded sponsors.
    • Firefox + uBO, Brave, Safari + Vinegar/Baking Soda, ReVanced on Android.
    • NewPipe, NewPipe forks with SponsorBlock, FreeTube, Piped frontends, mpv+yt‑dlp, and custom players via YouTube.js.
  • DNS/hosts‑file approaches (Pi‑hole, hosts lists) mostly fail now because YouTube serves ads from the same domains as video.

Ethics, economics, and Premium

  • Strong divide:
    • One side: ad‑blocking is “freeloading”; users should either watch ads or pay for Premium, especially given cheap monthly cost in some regions.
    • Other side: attention is not a debt; blocking ads is self‑defense against manipulation, tracking, and enshittification. Many refuse to pay on principle, especially to Google.
  • Some argue creators are harmed by ad‑blocking; others say they support creators directly via Patreon, etc., and see YouTube itself as the problem.
  • Multiple users say Premium pricing is too high, often bundled with unwanted services (Music), with no cheaper “ad‑free only” tier.

Future directions and DRM concerns

  • Several expect escalation: server‑side ad insertion, DRM/Web Integrity, or hardware attestation to make client‑side blocking harder.
  • Others argue YouTube “can’t win” technically as long as users control the client, predicting more sophisticated ad‑skipping (e.g., AI‑based or prefetching proxies).