It still exists. I'm currently paying for the ad free add on and often cancel and resubscribe to it before I'm about to watch anything.

Annoyingly though, even with that, it'll still show you skipable ads about other shows they have once before you start something in a session.

When I click "subscribe" on my TV it gives me three options, all with adverts

Maybe I could subscribe and take a risk that I could then buy something again, but it tells me they don't want people paying money, they want people watching adverts.

As such the rare amazon exclusives (mainly clarkson's farm) I will get elsewhere.

Compared to say Paramount, which I once again subscribed to through apple-tv a couple of months ago. I watch new Star Trek and South Park episodes, then unsubscribe, suits me fine, far cheaper than how I used to watch Star Trek in the 1990s.

Likewise I'll subscribe to Apple when for all mankind and morning show come back.

If they want me permamently subscribed, they should go back to making 26 episodes a year.

Because I want to actually support content creators. I also want it to be more normalized to pay for things vs having ad supported content.

Do you think giving money to the world's largest ad agency will encourage them to change their business model?

Their business model is already in line with my values. I give them money and in exchange I get an ad-free experience. They don't need to change.

If you care about whether content is ad supported or not, then Google are behind most of the world's ad supported content, and need to change, irrespective of your own transaction, unless you think transactions like that will change them. That's why I asked. It would be nice if it worked.

I'm not aware that you can pay for Google Search. That they have a paid tier for Youtube is probably to cater to another group of people rather than to "align with your values" and encourage people to actually pay for things online

It’s an opt out fee from Ads.

I don't think you're normalizing ad-supported content when running an ad blocker

As for paying for the content you consume, most of the costs aren't on Google's side. I can understand paying for Youtube as a shortcut to hopefully giving some pennies to each person you watch, though, at least for those with no moral objection to making Google's/Youtube's monopoly in online video stronger

Then subscribe to their Patreon instead of paying YouTube.

I was a bit surprised to find that Patreon also keeps a pretty large commission. But, yeah, at least it's not owned by Google and what else are you going to do when most creators list this as their only option. I'm just confused when there's easy options like sending cash directly to their IBAN or using a nonprofit like Liberapay (they just have their own donation page and, instead of taking a cut, make money that way: https://liberapay.com/Liberapay)

I also back people on patreon. Isn't it irrational to expect something for free? If you don't like the service or it doesn't align with your values, simply don't use it.

Also, isn't patreon also a middleman by your definition?

There's a difference between a middleman that simply ensures that you're paid for your work on a fixed commission-based model, and a middleman who basically controls the entire platform you use to reach your audience. A better analogy would be OnlyFans vs a pimp.

It’s a personal choice.

Once someone reaches a level of individual support that’s fine.

YouTube remains a place for discovering channels and people and some people especially the majority who are not technical, can outwit a simple family fee.

I use YouTube premium more than I ever used for paying Netflix for far longer. Value (and proven convenience) is in the eyes of the user.

I agree about YouTube being a platform for discovering new content, and even great content. I've even bought Premium for my parents and brother just so they wouldn't need to go through all sorts of ads on YouTube.

I would have bought the argument of the commenter if they talked about buying Premium to support the platform. But buying Premium to support the content creators? That's a bunch of horse manure.

I think primary and secondary motivations are OK - I'm not sure how the premium subscriptions are distributed to content creators other than by ad revenue.

One thing is for sure - an ad-free family is much more peaceful and able to enjoy the content itself, which can bode well for connecting with the content creators and appreciating the platform for what it is, and once was.

Patreon and BuyMeACoffee are middlemen...

There's a difference between a middleman that simply ensures that you're paid for your work on a fixed commission-based model, and a middleman who basically controls the entire platform you use to reach your audience. A better analogy would be OnlyFans vs a pimp.

Generally you can exchange some amount of money in return for not seeing ads...

Is it really a worthwhile platform if you have to buy a file manager?

FLOSS file-managers were decent already in the 90s.

I'm pretty happy paying for things I like. Solid explorer is a great file manager for Android that I also pay for.

I know paying money for goods and services is passé in this economy, but yes some things need you to invest money into them.

That's a good way of course, but there's also the option of using F-Droid.

Think of it like DataDog 2.0: https://devnull-as-a-service.com/

What is slow about them? I've never had issues with my ultra and frequently stream 4K HDR content. I have not found a good reason to upgrade to Google TV and prefer the cast-only behavior. I do have it connected to Ethernet though. Also, some services' casting implementations are less than ideal though.

This post made me wonder whether they quietly removed the feature. It's still there though. All my uploaded music from the Google music days is still there and there is still an option to upload new stuff.

It's not as well-integrated as it use to be in the Google Music days though.

I'm not sure what I'm missing out on by not using VSCode. LSP support in Sublime is quite good now and there are still tons of extensions.

A built-in debugger is probably the biggest thing I'm missing out on -- but I don't personally want that in my editor anyway.

VSCode's mediocre performance kind of grinds you down over a long period of time. It's hard to notice in any particular moment.

Sublime's extensions take a bit more research but they are an upfront cost rather than an ongoing irritation.

That said, taste is a factor. It's possible VSCode simply fits you in a way that it does not others.

They've been making me take my mask off for precheck still at SFO and LAX.

https://github.com/sublimelsp/LSP with https://github.com/sublimelsp/LSP-typescript works pretty well for me. They are also both being actively maintained. It'd be nice if it was built-in, but it works well enough that I still have not found a compelling reason to switch to VSCode.

I really love sublime and it doesn't seem to be dead just yet. Sublime Text 4 was also a pretty great release.

I've been using ChromeOS as my primary OS for a couple years now (though, not sure I'd be willing to use it for work just yet). The officially supported Linux container integration is extremely well-done. I get all the benefits of a stable OS, but with (almost) all the flexibility of a real Linux environment. Linux and Android apps seamlessly integrate into the ChromeOS desktop environment.