What do I mind is that the consent is usually implied a-priori, and when it's not, the UX of opting out is an unnecessary nuissance. Advertising is not about informing users, but creating a need before we're able to say no. I'm driving a car and can't access my phone, YT plays a recommended video with sponsored content I hear before I have the choice to switch it off. That's just a tiny example, but these things add up.

(Speaking as someone with experience in psychology, publishing and ad tech here, so that's my primary focus/perspective.)

Here's my personal ideal for a platform like YT:

- Take a service fee cut (e.g. 30%)

- allocate the remaining 70% of money to the people I watched

(optional) let me allocate some of my budget to a random pool of other creators so I can support their growth/someone else's free access to content.

This can work. An example would be Guardian relying on donations, where many people pay so others can access their content. (look for their case studies to learn more)