[SOLVED]Youtube - Apparently unblockable and long/multiple adverts, New policy - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 02:32:53 pm
content: Youtube - Apparently unblockable and long/multiple adverts, New policyEarly indications are that LONG adverts = 1 minute duration each, repeating about every 6 minutes (very rough estimate).It may be switching the advert(s) into the video stream itself (I'mNOTsure), which would make them much harder to block.E.g. Adblock plus. (which I am currently using).I absolutely CAN'T stand adverts, and find them WAY too distracting. It could easily massively reduce my consumption of youtube videos.EDIT: I may be reacting TOO quickly. It might be that adblock plus needs more time to fix this.On the other hand, sooner or later youtube might end up doing this (unblockable adverts via video feed), so it is still a valid point.Here is the one which keeps on having at least two built in, and long adverts.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 02:41:18 pm
content: WILD SPECULATIONGoogle may introduce some kind of "pass" system (I think they may have already talked about it previously). Pushing people into getting a sort of subscription for youtube to make it advert free.If the charges are reasonable and if they guarantee that the content producers see much of that money. I may not feel that it is such a bad thing. Since people pay for other media sources, such as some TV channels, Netflix, DVDs/blu-rays etc.Maybe it even allows extra free, similar to paid for content as well, such as extra full length movies etc.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 02:52:01 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on August 09, 2017, 02:41:18 pmNo need for speculation, that's precisely what Youtube Red subscription does.

author: RGB255_0_0
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 02:59:10 pm
content: uBlock Origin has no idea what you're even talking about.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 03:01:57 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on August 09, 2017, 02:52:01 pmI'd heard about it a while ago, but wasn't sure about how far ahead with it they were going. But once I learned that it was NOT available in the UK. I stopped reading about it, and somewhat forgot about it.Apparently (I just googled it), it is coming out in the UK in 2017. I don't know the details, or if it has started yet.In partial defense of google. It must cost them a lot of money to host the youtube services. providing the extensive bandwidth, computing power and underlying software etc.Then there is the cost of people to watch out for bad videos etc.So with the ever increasing number of people using adblocking techniques and software. They (google) had to do something about it sooner or later.tl;drThis is like having to take horrible tasting, nasty medicine. But you HAVE to take it, otherwise things would get worse in the future. I.e. Youtube (division of google) would go bankrupt.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 03:04:55 pm
content: Quote from: RGB255_0_0 on August 09, 2017, 02:59:10 pmThanks for that suggestion, I must try thatI mean, I like watching the adverts so much, I can't use it.I'm trying it now.EDIT:I just tried it (uBlock Origin extension add on to Chrome browser), and I'm still getting the adverts.

author: RGB255_0_0
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 03:15:22 pm
content: Maybe it's per user (Google loves betas)

author: kalel
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 03:16:18 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on August 09, 2017, 03:04:55 pmThere are some video players that can play YouTube. One of them has an extension, called Potplayer. E.g. you have to click "Scroll button" to play the video from the player, and you have to do it for each video (actually playlists work too). It could get annoying for watching many short videos, but if you get ads then, the only explanation would be that they are built into the video stream.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 03:18:48 pm
content: Quote from: RGB255_0_0 on August 09, 2017, 03:15:22 pmIt's quite possible.That could be what has happened.Here is the what I saw:I've cutout the un-needed bits and compressed it. Also the ublock origin icon has been cut out and re-inserted into the picture.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 03:25:06 pm
content: Quote from: kalel on August 09, 2017, 03:16:18 pmThat sounds similar to my contingency plans.If youtube/google end up doing this long term, and there is no (unauthorized) way round it. Assuming the subscription service (red) is too expensive and/or I end up NOT getting it.I would try and pre-download the videos (similar or the same as you seem to be saying). Then I can fast-forward past any adverts. A bit like you can with TVs and video recorders or later hard disk playback devices.

author: kalel
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 03:40:17 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on August 09, 2017, 03:25:06 pmI believe that those players are capable of streaming the videos, so you could theoretically click on any part of the video, and it will start loading from there. They probably don't actually download and keep the files.That said, perhaps you will still get the ads.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 03:49:15 pm
content: Quote from: kalel on August 09, 2017, 03:40:17 pmWhen you watch it, with the actual youtube running in a webpage. When these adverts show, itFREEZESout the normal time controls etc. So you can't attempt to move forward in time (to dodge the advert).But if it is someone else player (such as the ones you are suggesting), you could just jump forward in time (assuming it has loaded its buffers that far), by 1 minute. Hence dodging the advert (but It would still be a nuisance and a bit of a distraction).It could be (as someone else posted about earlier), an initial (beta) test, just on some people. So they may NOT end up rolling this out permanently.When I googled this problem, it said that one possibility is that the adverts only show when you are signed into youtube (which I am currently).

author: RoGeorge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 03:56:09 pm
content: Maybe this is because Chrome is made by Google?Try 'uBlock Origin', but with Mozilla.This is what I am using, and I see no adds. Not in the video, not aside the video, no pre or post video insertions, no pop-ups, nothing but clean videos.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 03:59:08 pm
content: I download the videos with netvideohunter plugin then drop them into iTunes and sync my phone. Sounds like a lot of hassle but zero ads and no mobile data when I'm out is a must.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 04:10:03 pm
content: Quote from: RoGeorge on August 09, 2017, 03:56:09 pmI've done what you said, and so far it has worked. (No adverts yet, but it is VERY early days).So I did a clean install of Mozilla (Firefox), and when it asked to copy stuff (history/bookmarks/passwords etc) from Chrome I said "NO!".Then I installed ublock origin. I've NOT signed into youtube (in Mozilla), and won't while conducting this test, for the time being.I then played back a youtube video, which was (in Chrome)ALWAYScurrently starting with an advert. But in Mozilla it isn't (i.e. no adverts) so far.I will have to try it a lot longer, to see if it continues to work.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 04:15:59 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on August 09, 2017, 02:32:53 pmUnless Youtube also blocks skipping ahead in videos for the whole video, there should always be a way. It is up to Youtube to present ads in such a way that they are safe, so no 100 trackers following your every move, and that they are unobtrusive enough to be acceptable. By making more obnoxious ads, the world is just going to try to block them with more fervour.I am all for rewarding those who provide services, but not at all costs. Even though blocking any and all ads does not seem to be very fair towards the makers of content, it is the response of people being fed up of being tracked and bombarded.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 04:33:40 pm
content: They started making ads look like regular youtube videos, they are actually hosted as unlisted videos on the advertiser's site. There is no easy way to block them.I just got YouTube Red, it is totally worth the money. Until someone figures out a good way to block those ads again.Also, a trick I used to "skip" those unskippable ads - just refresh the page, until RNG decides you don't need an ad. Obviously only works for pre-roll stuff.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 04:39:44 pm
content: Quote from: ataradov on August 09, 2017, 04:33:40 pmThe thing is, youtube for me these days. Is acting like additional TV channels.E.g.Numerous Electronics channels.Vintage Computers (old films/programmes about them).Latest Computer Technology channels.Etc.So I can sort of justify youtube red, potentially. Just as you have.I'm NOT sure if it is available in the UK yet. I think it is NOT available, currently.It depends on how much it is (I know it is $10 in the US), but that can translate into anything from £5 to £12, for the UK. Depending on exchange rates and how google decide to do it. (I have seen it mentioned somewhere, that it is expected to be £10/month in the UK).Also what youtube Red actually offers, in the UK.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 04:47:22 pm
content: Either way I'm not paying for it. I pay for Apple Music currently which I see as valuable as there are 5 of us and 9 devices in the family so it represents good value for the content and replaces the amount of time I was fiddling with mp3s before.As far as I'm concerned with video content, because you can't do anything else while watching videos unlike music, your attention is my payment (sorry Dave) as my time is valuable. I will pick and choose content to watch carefully and only consume it in dead time.

author: Ampera
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 05:17:02 pm
content: Currently using traditional adblock (white hand) and I got no ads on the video, or anywhere else. There will always be a constant battle for ads, but if they completely make the ads unblockable I'll just buy Youtube Red. It's not THAT expensive, and I get some premium content from people like VSauce, and an easier ability to download videos, especially on mobile devices, which I love being a video pack rat.It would be nice if they reduced the price, maybe even to 5 bucks a month, or included better plans, but it's still not a terrible thing.

author: RoGeorge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 06:55:24 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on August 09, 2017, 04:10:03 pmFYI, I am always logged into YouTube, because I want to see when new videos are available from the channels I am subscribed to. I don't like notifications or unsolicited messages of any kind, so when I have time, I am polling to see if something has appeared by clicking on a shortcut that was placed to the 'Bookmarks Toolbar'.This is how I browse YouTube:https://www.youtube.com/feed/subscriptions

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 07:20:57 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on August 09, 2017, 04:47:22 pmPaying Google, who is already makes piles of money collecting all sorts of data, also with actual money does not sit right. If paying meant opting out of any and all data collection, I would not mind spending a fair amount at all.

author: BrianHG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 02:11:47 am
content: @MK14, what are you talking about. Get rid of your ad blocker. I have no ad blocker and the youtube video you posted had no video ads in it. Just 3 little pop-up banners at 3 points in the video. Your ad blocker is making youtube give your extraneous ads which isn't even an issue on your linked video for those of us who don't cheat.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 02:49:15 am
content: Quote from: BrianHG on August 10, 2017, 02:11:47 amAs a result of my ad-blocker, I had received no adverts on youtube, for a long time. Maybe the last 12 months. When using Chrome on this computer, with the ad-blocker enabled. Unless I opened an incognito window.That particular advert, seems to be targeted at me in particular (or rather the marketing group(s) which google have probably assigned to me). My understanding (but I'm GUESSING) is that adverts are targeted at users, rather than necessarily being 100% connected to particular videos. Although particular videos (e.g. EEVblog = Electronics - Electronics related adverts make sense), also probably trigger things at google as well.There is probably lots of information about it on the internet (online adverts, and how they work), but I've probably never read them, and have little interest in them.If I use Chrome now, it still tries to show me that advert (so I stop and close it, almost immediately).So far the Mozilla/Firefox has been ad free. So I will keep at it (use it when I watch youtube), and see if it continues to be ad-free long term.If I open an incognito window in Chrome (it hides all your cookies and other private stuff), it shows a different 20 second advert (or rather tries to, I stop it after about 2 seconds, lol).It seems to be a more generic British Gas advert.Anyway, in time the truth will come out, as regards this Google/Adverts VS ad-blockers etc VS Google Red subscriptions.I'm surprised it seems to be only me so far. Googling for this issue (raised recently in the last week), ironically mainly brings up this threadSo it could be a problem with my setup (which has weakened the ad-blockers) or something.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 02:55:00 am
content: Quote from: MK14 on August 09, 2017, 02:32:53 pmWell, I had to speed it up to 2x and then skip forward with the mouse to avoid getting bored, but I didn't see any adverts. So if there are special embedded adverts they may be region specific.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 03:13:40 am
content: Quote from: BrianHG on August 10, 2017, 02:11:47 amActually I need to apologize to you.My ad-blocker software WAS partly to blame.What someone else is saying happened (I link to the information source, lower down), is that there was a skip button.But the ad-blocker software BLOCKED the skip button itself, because it was associated with adverts.So when the advert successfully got through the ad-blocker software, the SKIP button was still blocked.So the "Unstoppable 1 minute adverts", Was probably fully skip-able, except my ad-blocker had messed that up.In the following link, LOTS of people, have had a similar problem to me, in the last half-day or so:https://www.reddit.com/r/Adblock/QuoteQuote

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 03:22:31 am
content: Quote from: IanB on August 10, 2017, 02:55:00 amSorry, that I've caused confusion. When I first encountered the problem, I thought (apparently incorrectly now), that youtube had cracked down big time on people using ad-blockers and similar techniques, to avoid watching adverts.But it seems that the reality, was it was a problem with the ad-blocker software I was using (and maybe some changes at google, I'm not sure).As you say, adverts probably change for different regions (and maybe different user profiles), and maybe other criterion.

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 04:05:03 am
content: At US$5/month, YouTube Red seems like a real bargain considering the cost of hosting and streaming those exabytes of video. I have had it for over a year now and it is one of the best monthly recurring expenses I use.I'd like to know why I have to log into iTunes and have an internet connection to be able to listen MY tracks I loaded onto my iPod? The more I use those Apple iGadgets the more I loathe them. What are good alternatives to iPod these days?

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 05:27:54 am
content: Quote from: Richard Crowley on August 10, 2017, 04:05:03 amI don't know the answer to this. How and when did this happen?

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 05:29:50 am
content: Maybe Youtube could use a hybrid P2P network? Where users who donate their bandwidth can get credit to use for premium content?Quote from: Richard Crowley on August 10, 2017, 04:05:03 amFiio seems to be a pretty popular "iPod alternative" nowadays.

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 06:41:51 am
content: Quote from: IanB on August 10, 2017, 05:27:54 amFrom the moment I loaded them. Some of my tracks play exactly as expected. And a large percentage of them say "Connect to WiFi to play music. To play songs when you aren't connected to Wi-Fi, turn on Use Cellular Data in Music in the Settings app." Or it simply says "Item not available. This item can't be played." I watched these things get downloaded to the iGadget from my computer, so Apple is lying to me.HUH? I loaded the tracks into the memory of the iThing because I want to listen to them when I am AWAY from WiFi. And why on earth should I burn up cellular data when I loaded the track locally? This just makes absolutely zero sense to me. I really detest the Apple "walled garden". I'm ready to flush this stupid thing down the toilet.

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 06:52:30 am
content: Quote from: Richard Crowley on August 10, 2017, 06:41:51 amYou are not alone.I hate iTunes.

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 06:57:38 am
content: Quote from: Brumby on August 10, 2017, 06:52:30 amSo do I. I didn't even use iTunes. I used a 3rd party app (https://www.copytrans.net) to load everything. So apparently Apple deleted the contents after I downloaded it.

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 07:09:19 am
content: From what I've seen and heard, that's the Apple approach.Like new management that walks into an established business and cleans out everything because they know better.When I came up to getting my first Smartphone, I was getting into some web development - so I asked myself what would be the best way to go ... Apple or Android? Since Apple was flying high at the time, I decided to go that way and ended up with an iPhone 4. It worked OK as a phone - but I found iTunes to be reprehensible in its arrogance. I suffered through the 2 year contract, switched to Android and purged any and all traces of iTunes.Never again.Actually, I still have that iPhone 4 if anybody wants it. Still have the original box, plug pack and accessories (ear buds never used - I just don't like that style).

author: RoGeorge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 07:09:23 am
content: I have an ancient iPod nano 4G that was won at a contest long time ago. Never used iTunes, but Floola.Copied Floola for Windows, Linux and Mac on the iPod, plug the iPod into any computer, then just start 'floola' from the iPod drive. Nothing to install. Now can copy music from or to iPod.No restrictions ever.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 07:25:56 am
content: Quote from: IanB on August 10, 2017, 05:27:54 amThis doesn't happen unless you use iCloud sync and then you only need an internet connection the first time so it can copy the file.Going to be honest, iTunes does suck. But only on Windows. It's smooth and reliable on my Mac. In the year I've owned my iPhone and Mac I've had literally only two problems: one sign in issue with Apple Music (asked every time you played something) which was resolved by signing in again and one mp3 file of mine that wouldn't play and that turned out to be corrupted. Literally nothing else across any part of either platform. They just work for me.This is a revelation after 25 years writing software on windows.

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 07:29:45 am
content: My argument isn't howwelliTunes works - it's abouthowiTunes works.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 07:37:37 am
content: I'm a pragmatist so I traded control over the process and how it works (which is the problem here really as it's certainly not reliability) for the fact that they take away ALL of the time required to curate and manage a large mp3 collection and distribute it between 4 other family members and 6 devices. This was a massive overhead spanning several hours a week on a bad week. Even an hour down the pan isn't worth saving the £15 sub. Now everyone just gets what they want and leaves me alone

author: RoGeorge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 07:57:52 am
content: Quote from: bd139 on August 10, 2017, 07:25:56 amNot a big Windows or Microsoft fan here, but that statement is NOT fare.Windows is working on a huge variety of hardware, while Apple stays close to only a few of their dedicated Apple hardware.Windows is writing their own software, while Mac is just taking the free GNU-Linux and lock it down to their hardware.Windows is dealing with thousands of 'intimate' pieces of code, like firmware and drivers written outside Microsoft, while Apple asks the chip manufacturer for a dedicated driver, and so on.Praising somebody (Apple) for a simple but well done job, is OK.Blaming others (Microsoft) for not being perfect while dealing with a way much more complexity, is NOT fare.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 08:07:04 am
content: Let's have some facts. I'm in charge of about 300 windows servers and workstations, about 50 Apple desktops and 150 Linux servers for ref.a) Windows is tested at the vendor stage if you buy canned kit from HP/Dell/Lenovo etc. Hardware is never the problem these days. ALL of the problems are above the HAL and in the OS that sits on top of it. There's no issue with hardware support here. The difference is moot. In fact I have yet to find something that you just can't plug into a mac and it just works instantly.b) Hardly anything on OSX is GNU, just a few terminal tools. Apple wrote or inherited everything else from NeXT. They wrote the programming language (Objective C), contributed the majority of code to the compilers they use, wrote the kernel, the device drivers, frameworks, applications, everything. Just like microsoft.c) Windows has hardware qualification (WHQL).Microsoft do a shitty job of QA of all of the parts that float above the hardware and vendor specific things. I spend at least 3 hours a week on the phone to our partner rep facepalming. That and the complete development schizophrenia going on for the last 20 years. It's hitting a poorly engineered moving target.I exclude NT kernel from this which is pretty good. The Win32 and above layer is the problem.

author: RoGeorge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 08:21:43 am
content: If point 'b)' is the true, then I was the unfair one, to Apple. My apologies.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 08:38:56 am
content: It's a common misconception. It's amazing what they have written. Check the following page out which lists it all:https://developer.apple.com/documentation/Edit: oh forgot. They also wrote the WebKit browser engine which Google adopted and contributed to as part of Chrome as the browser engine. Google forked that recently but Apple have written some massive things. So you're probably using Apple code whatever you do anyway.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 09:57:38 am
content: Quote from: MK14 on August 09, 2017, 02:32:53 pmThis is excellent news. Why?... Perhaps it will persuade people to make shorter more cogent videos.Inside most 10 minute yootoob videos there is a 30s video trying to escape. Far too many videos are full of people umming and ahhing while wandering towards making a simple obvious point that oftentimes could be expressed in text. They do that because, to misquote Pascal and others, "sorry this video is so long, I didn't have time to make it shorter".Clearly they regardtheirtime as more important than their audiences' time.If you want to see examples of good, well-planned videos where the pictures are necessary, have a look at the Pace Soldering Tutorials.Some things really were better in the past (in this case due to production and ditribution costs)!

author: kalel
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 10:20:59 am
content: Quote from: tggzzz on August 10, 2017, 09:57:38 amAre shorter videos really better? Sure, the concept of video series exists, but if a video is trying to teach something, I would rather hear the details than just see the person put something together and possibly rush over some numbers. As an example, I can't imagine BigClive's videos being cut down to a benefit, even though not all are long. Same with Dave, most videos are over 5-6 minutes and it just wouldn't be the same if that was the limit.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 10:52:43 am
content: Since Youtube often stutters over my US ISP, I usually download the entire video and watch it offline so I would not notice the ads anyway.

author: rdl
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 11:01:32 am
content: One thing I'm pretty sure of is if you don't want to see advertising, then you don't want to use a browser provided by a company that derives most of its revenue from advertising.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 01:32:39 pm
content: Quote from: kalel on August 10, 2017, 10:20:59 amI didn't claim that.In the bit you snipped I used the word "most", and most != all. My claim that stands, for the reasons you snippedTwo otherrealdisadvantages of video:video isn't searchable for keywords; if you can't find something it might as well not existI speed read text toquicklydetermine whether an article is worth reading in detail; since searches are imperfect, most aren't relevant. You can't speedview videos, so it takesat least 10* moreof my little remaining life to determine that it isn't interesting. Bad tradeoff, but I wouldn't expect a youngster to have that perspective!

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 02:29:02 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on August 10, 2017, 01:32:39 pmIn fairness, to an extent, you are right. But with a change of methods and acceptance that it is not as easily or reliably searched through, as a decent text article, you can do those things with videos. To a degree, but not to 100% effectiveness, as with text.The alternative to speed reading, is to read the title and speed read the descriptive text (if filled in), just below the video on youtube and/or to jump at various time positions and watch a few seconds of the video at 5 mins, 10 mins, 15 mins etc (use common sense to determine where to click on the time line).You can still partially text search or keyword search on it, by hoping that someone, somewhere has commented on it, in a blog or similar.E.g.You want a video showing how to design a linear power supply with the older 2N3055 power transistors. Which you so happen to have 5 of, as part of your component collection.You then google (take this search string as a very loose/rough example) "2N3055 power supply design" and select type of search = video.You can then jump through and check a few seconds of the video at strategic time positions, to see how good it is (and look at the pos/neg votes + comments can be quickly skimmed through).I have just done this search for real, to show you the concept:The first one it finds seems to be this one:By skimming through and quickly looking at a few (of the more promising search results), I found this one (see below), which seems more promising. It seems to include the schematic, is amazingly compact (short, < 3 minutes), has a high pos/neg vote ratio 9 pos, 0 neg, and seems rather interesting and fun, from my quick skim through:

author: SkyMaster
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 03:10:37 pm
content: Quote from: Mr. Scram on August 09, 2017, 07:20:57 pmGoogle is owned by Alphabet, and according to Wikipedia;Revenue: US$90.27 billion (2016)Operating income: US$23.71 billion (2016)Net income: US$19.47 billion (2016)Total assets: US$167.49 billion (2016)Total equity: US$139.04 billion (2016)Number of employees: 72,053 (2017)Wikipedia and Mozilla Foundation need our money more than Google.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 04:09:53 pm
content: When I was young, information was scarce abd it took day/weeks to access it - so the skill was to take time extracting as much information as possible from the few available sources.Now the problem isexactly the reverse: information is so common that the necessary skill is quickly determining whatnotto look at. Video is very effective at preventing that.Quote from: MK14 on August 10, 2017, 02:29:02 pmNothing, including text, is 100% effectiveI'll ignore searches with specific answers such as "what are the microwave x-band frequencies?", since the first result is probably sufficient - even without clicking the link.Many of my searches are for topics that are sufficiently complex or abstruse that there is often only, say, one potentially useful result per page.QuoteYebbut that takes 10* as long. You have to wait for the video to load, then figure out the context at that point in the video, then guess what night or might not be in the gaps...OTOH, I'm a fast reader.As an exercise, take one of the EEVBlog videos and deliberately ignore the table of contents - because most vloggers aren't that considerate of their audience. Pretend that you have stumbled upon "EEVblog #1013 – Mailbag" because you were searching for "2DW233 Voltage Reference Zener".How long does it take to find that part of the video, and to determine whether or not it helps you?Text is an order of magnitude faster.EDIT: I've just tried it. It took ~4 mins to find the start of that segment, then ~3 mins watching it (which is much shorter than most videos). That's ~7 minutes of my remaining life I'll never get back.If it had been text then it would have take 30s to find out that it is marginally interesting. Bad tradeoff.QuoteAh, the AltaVista/Yahoo! model of curated directories of links. Not scalable, as was obvious back in 1995 before google was even a .edu.One acceptable, workable alternative is the "table of contents"with timesbelow the video in the EEVBlog videos. But that is very rare

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 05:29:07 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on August 10, 2017, 04:09:53 pmI agree with your post.In the old days (when some of us were younger), there were both good and bad things, compared to old and new.In the distant past, there were lots of books available in libraries (effectively free) or to purchase (at reasonable cost for most people). These generally created trustworthy, high quality sources of information (within Electronics). But were not so good for computers, because a book was outdated (usually/often), almost before it was first available.There were also less trustworthy, lower quality sources, such as Electronics magazines.So for example, if a book gave you a power supply circuit. You could probably build it and it would work first time (not always), and perform as stated.But if you built a similar power supply from a circuit in a magazine, it might work first time. But may need some messing about (even if built perfectly to the magazine circuit), just to get it to work well.But that did probably help with the learning Electronics part of the exercise.These days, (as you have already started to explain), there is a crazily large amount of information. Available 24/7/365, often for free, mostly available anywhere in the world (ignoring North Korea, and to some extent some other countries).But the quality and accuracy of much of the information, is not necessarily 100%.So you really have to be careful.For myself (because I miss the old days), I think I (we) have to accept that the old days are gone now. Times have moved on, and things work somewhat differently now.Although text is a very good and precise information medium. Video, can actually give you much more perspective (short of having the experience yourself), on how things really are.E.g. My text might say that the ASR33 terminals were somewhat big, noisy, but fun to watch while they print from a paper tape. But by watching a video of an ASR33 doing that, it gives you a better perspective of it. To actually see one, these days (ignoring the odd museum, here end there), would otherwise be VERY difficult.Watching such videos, brings back memories of what it was like, for me.

author: RoGeorge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 06:15:17 pm
content: IMO, text is still better than video for technical/scientific information and learning.The biggest trap with video is that it makes youthinkthat you learnt/understood, when in fact you didn't. You just get thefeelingof learning, instead of getting the actual learning.It's easy to watch at somebody else and think "aha, got it!". But when you try to actually reproduce what you just saw, you realize that you didn't "got it" very well.This problem doesn't happen when using written material instead of video, I don't know why.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 06:41:04 pm
content: 1. Read a little bit.2. Do a little bit.3. Goto 1It's the only way.I gave up going to lectures at university as per videos now. I rarely watch any. Total waste of time. Low information density. We found out pretty rapidly that the lecturers didn't necessarily know the topic either and the whole damn thing was box ticking to get to the exams and projects.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 08:21:00 pm
content: Quote from: RoGeorge on August 10, 2017, 06:15:17 pmI don't disagree, but I find those problems occur with both text (textbooks) and video (lectures).When I was at university, I scribbled the lectures down as the lecturer spoke. Then, within a couple of hours before I had forgotten it, I re-wrote the scribbles in a coherent formand added the bits that were missing from the scribbles and my understanding.That recapitulation and addition was vital to getting the knowledge into my brain, and it formed a great basis for revision.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 08:34:02 pm
content: I use AdBlock Ulitimate and NoScript.I saw one add when I first loaded Youtube this evening, then none afterwards. I've been listening to random music, for the last four and a half hours without a single advert.It's interesting that I saw the add at the start. I wonder why that is?

author: rdl
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 10:33:48 pm
content: I don't see ads on youtube, or anywhere really, and haven't for many years. All I use is NoScript and a hosts file that's pushing 29,000 entries. I started using uBlock Origin when Ghostery became "no longer supported" on Pale Moon, but that's only been since about a year or so. I didn't really install it to block ads.Some people claim a hosts file is the wrong way to block ads because it slows things down, but from what I've seen, it's not as slow as displaying the ads.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2017, 07:02:06 am
content: The following article from a very recent register page. Explains about new trends, where there is stuff, especially designed to defeat ad blocking schemes.https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/08/11/ad_blocker_bypass_code/