My child watched a 10 minute video the other day on a machine that doesn't have an adblocker installed on it.

There were 4 "commercial breaks" of 2, unskippable 30 second ads. So, 4 minutes extra.

That's an extra 40% of the original video length (10 minutes). That's 30% of the total length (14 minutes).

It's almost exactly the same as broadcast tv, maybe slightly high? TV averages 12-20 minutes per 60 of tv being ads.

Not really sure what to do with that. It feels like I should be upset, but really, it's proportionate to what already exists and I'm only upset because it's worse than it was 10 years ago.

In your summary, you described: -A service you pay for (traditional cable) has 30-40 percent of it's time -dedicated to charging you more. (time cost to watch the ads). -It has gotten worse both traditionally and on streaming media. -Your child, who is in no way associated with the payment structure, is forced to absorb malicious ads despite being too young to consent to the information being "forced". -(my observation) Media spot advertising does not work, is largely targeted incorectly.

We're PAYING for our kids to become desensitized to attention-vampiricity and we're unsure if it is ok to be upset? Yes!

So that's not what I was getting at. I was simply comparing the ad content from YouTube to traditional media. The original post claimed that it has too many ads, so I thought I'd do the math. I was surprised it turned out the way it did. Maybe that is just conditioning?

Your argument is a different thing. Valid as well, but completely different.