yep. there's a word for a creature that consumes without contributing anything back, making things harder for everyone else: "parasite."

Alphabet has plenty of money. So long as I'm capable of watching Youtube for free with adblock on, I will continue to do so and feel no guilt.

I can't stop you but just know that you're part of the problem.

I don’t see the problem here. YouTubers can make content or not. Either way they are not entitled to my money.

You're not entitled to their content either but you force yourself to it anyway.

Sure we are. If you make your content available on a public platform, where it is both possible and legal to watch it for free, then we are entitled to it if we choose to utilize the tools that make it possible, until or unless it becomes illegal or impossible.

It’s possible but not legal, just unenforced. We understand that you feel entitled to use things without paying for them but don’t try to dress it up as anything more noble or pretend to be surprised if enforcement escalates.

And this is exactly why YouTube should block ad blockers, to force people like you to be honest.

I fail to see how I'm being dishonest. It's not like I'm lying about how I use it.

Today you get to learn that words can have multiple definitions!

That kinda sounds like lying.

And thus YouTube is experimenting with an ad-blocker detection mechanism.

I'd gladly watch the content somewhere else if Google wasn't holding a monopoly over it.

Good news, they aren’t. Tons of content is on multiple services - if you really have a principled objection to Google, you should show that by supporting those services rather than boosting YouTube’s popularity.

"Tons of content on multiple services" =/= "Tons of alternative services"

There is only one viable alternative to Youtube that I'm aware of. I use it whenever I can, but that doesn't change the fact that Youtube holds a monopoly.