As the parent pointed out, there's a simple way for Youtube to deal with me "feeling entitled to use their computer" -- either don't make your computers publicly available via a standard web api, or return the appropriate response via that standard web api, which would be an HTTP error code.
When the server returns a 200 and the video to my request of 'video for free please', that is them choosing to accept my request for the video. Just as the common refrain goes that 'if you don't like ads, you can just not use Youtube', the argument that 'if Youtube doesn't like me blocking ads on my computer, they can just not serve me the videos' applies equally.
You are proposing making the internet worse to try and justify your leeching. They give you a way to use there service with out ads and magically you have an excuse not to do that to. You are a drain, if you're happy making the world worse that is on you mate but stop trying to make it into some holy noble cause. You're just being cheap and selfish.
I appreciate seeing your argument devolve down to just a personal attack instead of actually addressing the points I raised. I feel much more intelligent after this conversation with you.
You raised no points. You said you don't like ads. It was pointed out you can pay to not see ads and you said that was just as bad(because reasons? You're morally opposed to ad based systems but you aren't opposed enough to stop propping YouTube up with traffic. Your morals stop exactly where they would start to inconvenience you, they are pretend). And that if they really want you to compensate them for taking their resources they should make the internet worse by making it impossible for anyone to choose viewing ads over paying. You're selfish and trying to find a way to justify it that doesn't boil down to selfish and cheap and you won't find it because that is literally your only justification.
> I feel much more intelligent after this conversation with you
You're welcome. Hopefully you'll feel like being less of a leech too.
They are in that paid traffic is essential for them but I don't directly receive income from ads for any of them. At least not in a way that an ad blocker would negatively impact my income.
When the server returns a 200 and the video to my request of 'video for free please', that is them choosing to accept my request for the video. Just as the common refrain goes that 'if you don't like ads, you can just not use Youtube', the argument that 'if Youtube doesn't like me blocking ads on my computer, they can just not serve me the videos' applies equally.