YouTube is now blocking ad blockers so I make ads run faster

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

YouTube’s recent moves to detect and block ad blockers are prompting users to devise new client-side tricks, such as browser extensions that accelerate ads to 10–16x speed instead of removing them outright. Commenters debate the sustainability and ethics of ad-funded platforms versus paying for YouTube Premium, with many objecting both to heavy ad loads and to Google’s data collection and market power. Broader themes include the escalating “arms race” between platforms and users, comparisons to traditional TV and other streaming services, and calls for alternative ecosystems or regulation around tracking and advertising.

Technical workarounds and tools

  • Many report YouTube still ad‑free with Firefox/Chromium + uBlock Origin (sometimes Privacy Badger, custom filters, or “quick fixes” lists). Rollout of anti‑adblock is seen as partial and region‑dependent.
  • DNS‑level blocking (Pi‑hole) is ineffective because YouTube serves ads from the same domain and refuses to play content if ads fail.
  • New approaches: browser extensions/bookmarklets that massively speed up ads (up to 16×, the browser’s apparent cap) or auto‑skip using DOM hooks. Some see these as “second line of defense” behind normal adblockers.
  • Other tools mentioned: SponsorBlock (skip in‑video sponsorships), DeArrow (de‑clickbait titles/thumbnails), SmartTubeNext (TV), Invidious/Piped/FreeTube/NewPipe (alt frontends), iSponsorBlockTV (TV sponsor skipping), video speed controllers.

Browser & extension platform issues

  • Concern over Chrome’s Manifest V3 limiting adblockers; some argue MV3 doesn’t kill blockers outright, others say it removes key dynamic mechanisms.
  • Firefox will support MV3 but says it will keep stronger extension APIs, so many expect Firefox adblockers to remain effective.

YouTube Premium vs blocking

  • Some call Premium one of their best subscriptions and argue that if you watch a lot of YouTube it’s cheap relative to time saved, and supports creators via rev‑share.
  • Others say price is too high, or they use YouTube only sporadically; they’d pay a few dollars or per‑use, not $15–$17/month bundles with Music.
  • Widespread distrust that paying now guarantees an ad‑free future; people reference cable and other streamers that later added ads or “ad‑lite” paid tiers.

Ethics and “right to block ads”

  • One side: using adblockers while consuming the service is “leeching,” undermining a costly platform and creators’ income; everyone should either watch ads or pay.
  • Other side: ads are intrusive, manipulative, and often privacy‑violating; users have an absolute right to control their own devices (analogized to muting TV ads, going to the bathroom during commercials, closing eyes/plugging ears). Blocking is framed as self‑defense, not theft.
  • Some argue YouTube’s dominance was built via years of unprofitable, ad‑subsidized dumping that killed competitors; they see no obligation to “fix” that model.

Broader concerns and endgame scenarios

  • Fears of escalating arms race: server‑side stitched ads, CAPTCHAs after ads, webcam/eye‑tracking, WEI/DRM to lock out adblockers, or AI agents that strip ads at the display layer.
  • Others predict practical limits: if ads get too long and frequent, people leave or drastically reduce usage, breaking the model.