Yt-dlp – A YouTube-dl fork with additional features and fixes
github.com
github.com
Edit: Correct typo
[1] https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/issues/21 [2] https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/blob/master/Changelog.md#20...
Also what sponsored content are people downloading versus just streaming live? I don’t get the use case.
Yes. Some of us don't like being assaulted with sales pitches everywhere we look.
0: https://www.tubics.com/blog/what-counts-as-a-view-on-youtube....
1: https://i.judge.sh/rare/Cherry/chrome_H0p9bAoLgy.png the red line is how far in i've watched.
Though, YouTube seems to do some aggressive deduping here, if I download from 5 different IPs, excluding the IP I'm logged into YouTube's services, I see 5 views. If I download 50 times from one IP, I see one view.
We DO NOT want to look at ads. If their solution is ads, we'll block them. When are they gonna understand this?
Here's an example of one that is... nonsensical and perhaps a bit humorous (well, at least I liked it): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0jPLRtEEjhU
Then don't use the sponsor segment removal portion of the tool. Simple as that.
Those of us who don't want "clever" advertising any more than "annoying" advertising can use it. And that's that.
> But sponsor segments... sometimes make me actually want to buy the product
That's exactly what I don't want: more sophisticated psychological manipulation that gets me to buy more stuff.
Yes this is why we dislike them (other than time wasting)
I don't want to be manipulated into buying crap, I'm good enough doing that myself
If you are watching for free, and you're that annoyed by ads, then maybe you just feel entitled.
If the the content is there, I'll watch it; if it's not, I won't. I certainly don't feel entitled to it.
If anything, the sense of entitlement seems to be emanating firmly from the people who upload the videos: they seem to think that because they upload videos, they are entitled to make money from them. Sorry, no.
When I follow a YouRuber (I'm borrowing that typo, I like it) and have seen them descend into the paid/promotional arena, I have been turned off and stopped subscribing to their channel.
Advertising tends to naturally weed out, for me, the ones who are not as passionate about what they do. Sorry if this model is counter to YT's business model.
Better: if you want to make a business out of it, sell plans like WoodenGears guy, or kits like Ben Eater.
> Advertising tends to naturally weed out, for me, the ones who are not as passionate about what they do.
This is a remark I see over and over again, basically "You're only in it for the money" once you do sponsors. Here's the thing that no one really gets, Youtube is not a hobby. I don't care what the channel topic is, building cars, lathe projects, tech reviews, pets, etc. The hobby for the creator is the subject, not the video production platform or process. Youtube is not social media, we're not posting videos so our friends can see what we're up to. The entire system is built completely differently from something like facebook, twitter, instgram, etc. It requires actual work. Planning videos, making thumbnails, responding to comments from strangers, making business connections, and more when you get larger. "Making videos" themselves isn't just waving a camera around while you do something either and requires it's own thought and effort.
Anyone who has reasonable success on Youtube can be monetarily rewarded for that. That alone creates an expectation that it could possibly be a source of income from the outset. If you can achieve making it a sustainable income source capable of being lived off of, why wouldn't you? You can continue to do and build upon your actual hobby, whatever it is. But instead of working a different "conventional" job you do video production, PR, marketing, and potentially advertising. The problem is that the on platform advertisement revenue is not enough to cover the effort and resources required to make videos as you become more serious about it. Part of this is on viewers because Youtube knows if you are using adblock. I can see this on the back end, on average for my channel less than 50% of views are monetized. So if nobody used adblock I could make literally double the amount on just the on platform ads alone. But that's not how it is and it's not going to change.
So you have to do something else as well. Personally, as a Youtuber, I see two revenue paths. You either go crowd funded with something like Patreon or do sponsors. You can do both but unless it's well done and relevant it feels like double dipping to me. But the in video sponsors aren't any different than the other advertisements on platform on youtube, except they aren't blocked by adblock. (Youtubers properly disclosing the ads is a completely separate issue that should not besmirch everyone who does it.) Youtubers don't get to choose their sponsor partners unless they are gigantic and have to take what they can get. We get tons of spam offers that try to screw us, taking real ones from even slightly reputable companies can make a big impact. Youtubers should do a better job of picking them, but not everybody understands something like what a VPN actually is and how is just moves your endpoint to a different set of private hands. But advertising is tied to media and not new at all. Complaining about a slightly more effective version of it is just naivety about how the service works and what the people who make the videos do.
TL;DR: Youtube is not a hobby, the subject Youtubers talk about is. Youtube is a job that takes real work, but it can't pay well enough, partly because of adblock. In video sponsors are just a different ad method that directly pays bypassing the adblock problem.
PS: I do not use adblock, partly because it feels hypocritical to make money on ads and then block them for others. The internet is indeed annoying without it, but I manage just fine.
Plenty of musicians, artists perform/create with no prospect of monetary gain. They do it for the accolades. They do it for the positive feedback. They do it because they have to: they're artists.
I suspect YouTubers like "Applied Science" are artists of a sort. I guess I'm drawn to YouTube artists.
Applied Science is a good example of someone who has not gone the sponsor route. He is crowd funded and has a Patreon page that is setup to charge when he releases a video(I'm a patron of his actually). It is still work to make the videos and describe what he's doing and how it works. He could be sponsored, even relevantly, if for example he used a Rigol scope to show something and then talked about it for a bit. But that wouldn't mean he is any less passionate about what he is doing.
The musicians and artists example is different though. Their hobbies produce media as an end result. Publishing it is part of the process. I make videos about vintage computers. My hobby without youtube would just be me sitting alone in a room tinkering. Creating a video out of whatever I'm doing requires deliberate additional effort.
Gessoing a canvas is work. Setting up, taking down a drum kit is work too. If you want the world to see your hobby, or your art, there is a cost involved. We accept that cost for exposure in return: for the joy of sharing in return.
I don't fault anyone wanting to make money from their hobby or their art. But I also respect a little more perhaps those, like Applied Science, that don't want to ... sully their art with a blatant sponsor plug.
Again though, I'm just a viewer, fan, enthusiast, lurker — the content creators get to make their own rules, I don't get to tell them how to run their channel.
Subscribed to your YT channel, BTW. Wrote a very early game on the Commodore PET, LOL.
Speak for yourself. I post videos on Youtube to show some low hundreds of people (including friends) that are subscribed to me what I'm up to, to give them a good laugh or to share some music, art or software I've made. No one owes it to me to elevate this hobby into a job. There are many Youtube channels like this.
Maybe if I had a million subscribers the urge to attract people with youtube-faced thumbnails and to monetize through shitty mobile game sponsorships would be overwhelming but I'd like to believe that I wouldn't be pissed off if people opted to mechanically skip the latter.
> So if nobody used adblock I could make literally double the amount on just the on platform ads alone.
If people didn't have access to clean water on tap, I could make more money selling bottled water.
There is no need to state the obvious. Nobody would miss any kind of advertisement in the media they consume but that doesn't answer how content creators are supposed to be compensated for the effort they put in.
And for me, a lot of the videos I download are played back, audio only, while I go for walks or am otherwise away from the Internet. YouTube lets you download videos, but my audio comes from multiple sources, YouTube is just one source. I can integrate yt-dlp into my feed reader so I don't need to think about the source anymore than I need to worry about going to a random podcast's website to listen to those.
In the end though, a tool like SponsorBlock is just another way I remove the annoyances from the modern Internet.
"MAKES IT SO YOUR ISP CAN'T SEE YOUR TRAFFIC" - yeah, congrats, now it's just another ISP that sees your traffic, which was probably protected by TLS anyway...
Heck, they even keep recommending the utility of Terms of Service violations like accessing contents from other regions.
VPN companies are scammy as hell.
You mean helping helpless US companies who doesn't understand that Europeans can understand English?
Or actually get the full database of movies when we pay the full price for Netflix?
Yeah, shame on us.
PS: I don't use VPNs to access Netflix, I just don't care to look at it anymore and one day I'll cancel it. No way I want to pay for the new stuff.
Edit: disagreement is acceptable but I'd like to see an explanation if possible.
Abiding by the terms of the agreement which you enter into with the company providing the service is a requirement to continue service and/or avoid liability, irrespective of whether it includes completely idiotic and archaic business practices and irrespective of whether this causes harm.
And yes, I also find Netflix to have extremely limited value.
This isn't the right way to overturn stupidity.
Not paying for a service whose terms you disagree with in areas you disagree. Using alternative services that do not have those terms. Demonstrating against the business practice. Petitioning for law that renders the terms illegal or invalid. Finding way to challenge the parasitic middlemen that are to blame. And so forth.
That said, I agree that it’s ridiculous if you take a step back, and in a sane world we wouldn’t have these types of restrictions. But it’s an artifact of an old, complicated system and isn’t something Netflix or anyone else can unilaterally fix.
I also agree with arghwhat that marketing your service as a way to violate another business’ terms of service doesn’t come across as serious, even if it’s not something I’d necessarily have a problem with personally.
In my experience, it's the same with ads everywhere else. It (usually) starts out not being overly obnoxious, with just a "this video is sponsored by [garbage tier mobile game/earphones/vpn/whatever] more about them at the end of the video" and then the pitch at the end.
I don't mind these. They quickly get the name out at the beginning and then don't interrupt the video. What really annoys me are the ones that interrupt the video. At some point a few of them annoyed me enough that I installed SponsorBlock. Because I don't want to hear or see these ads, but i tolerated them. But once that threshold is crossed where I don't tolerate all of them anymore, why would I not just block all of them? I'm not going to unblock specific channels that are well-behaved to listen to ads for products i will definitely never buy.
It's the exact same thing with regular ad-blocking. Sometimes when I'm on a fresh OS I start browsing the web and only notice I don't have an adblocker once I visit a page with super obnoxious ads (e.g. google on mobile and realize there's only ads and no organic results for like the first 5 screens).
Especially when those interruptions take two minutes. I don't mind them up to 30 seconds, but their length does get pretty ridiculous from time to time.
There's no medium that's gonna make watch two minutes ad without looking away or trying to skip it. You either sell it quickly or don't.
If your answer is nothing — I expect everything for free, then that’s both unrealistic and parasitic.
Not my department. I'm perfectly happy being a parasite. I used to watch Twitch every now and then. Twitch introduced server side ads and made ad-blocking unreliable and annoying - so i stopped using twitch.
My life doesn't depend on youtube, and if they decide to shut me out or the platform stops existing, that's fine with me. Maybe other video platforms can try out other models instead of that effective monopoly google has on online video currently.
I've also already said that I tolerate non-obnoxious ads. But looking at the rest of the web, it doesn't seem to go in that direction, so I'll keep blocking until they kick me out.
For channels that I watch regularly, I contribute to their Patreon if they have one. I shouldn't have to sit through a sponsorship segment in addition to that.
At the risk of nerd sniping myself, thinking deeper, I wonder if people who sign up for YouTube Premium do less random surfing on YouTube and instead focus on a few channels they love? That would _further_ concentrate their payouts. If true, then the 10x figure sounds reasonable.
Let - p := subscription price
- N := number of subscribers
- P:= total spotify money = p * N
In first approximation, let us consider that all subscribers listen to the same amount of music per month
- v := number of minutes of music per subscriber per month
- V := total number of music listened to = v * N
Then, by listening to a minute of an artist, the amount you add to that artist revenue is approximately
P / V = p / v
Which is a fraction of a non-infinitesimal number (in that first approximation)
You got confused by a fact that an infinitesimal number times an infinite number can very much be real
The reason being that people in the businessy genre already get 10x (~$10CPM) what a gaming channel (~$1CPM) gets because there's more advertisers and less channels. You'd need to know the source channel
Heck, youtube could even build in a patron feature much like twitch has with subscriptions.
Isn't this basically YouTube Membership[1]?
[1] https://www.lifewire.com/how-do-youtube-channel-memberships-...
Mass market viewers don't care, adblockers get ad free content, creator gets their slice. We all win
In the past 10 years or so quality has largely gone down and annoyances like ads and sponsor shoutouts have gone up to the extent "Sponsored by Raid: Shadow Legends" is an actual meme. There are very, very few content creators I feel are worth supporting. This ends up being a bit classist as mostly people with enough personal cash flow and free time can afford to become full-time content creators but by and large that's already kind of the case if you look at the people who become full-time content creators. But I personally feel that if your content is more of the "popcorn" variety that people use to fill their day but don't actually value compared to something people do value then the world at large isn't missing out. If enough people felt they would miss out - they'd pay to keep it around.
There are plenty of content creators I watch where I would not be all that sad if they vanished and they stopped creating content - because I use their content to fill gaps of boredom in my day and not because I place any significant value in their content. Then there are a few I absolutely do value and I already support them when possible. I assume ones without a method to directly support them are OK with losing some revenue to ad-blockers and the like. I have absolutely let personal opportunities of collecting cash slide past me because I weighed the effort to collect it to be greater than it was worth so I assume the reason they haven't opened up a way to donate to them directly is for similar reasons.
I consider ads to be psychological warfare and something that should (but never will) be illegal if they are designed to be emotionally manipulative in any way. If a dry, boring informercial doesn't inspire you to buy their product then it probably isn't worth buying howdy. I feel absolutely nothing bad about blocking them.
So much for that misplaced and invalid attempt at moralizing.
"are they so terrible?" and "what's the alternative?" are not my problem to answer, and I don't even have to agree they are valid questions that someone has to answer.
I do not accept the premise that the only way content can exist is if advertisers pay for it. That's a false dichotomy. There is no such either/or choice.
I will happily live in a world that only has content that was either fully paid for by purchasing copies or subscriptions, or given to the world for free.
You attempted to paint anyone using this software or anyone complaining about the ads as somehow morally lacking. I say, if you don't understand why anyone would give away something for free, and only think of the consumers as ungrateful parasites, then I think that says something worse about you than what you tried to say about anyone else.
How do you feel about DRM to make sure content is only accessible to those who paid for it?
And before you say "but creators have to make money too" - independent art gets created just fine without capitalistic motives, and I vastly prefer the patreon model, or just paying up front for larger content (documentaries, games, films etc).
(Although in this particular case, I'm pretty fine with the sponsor method with most of the creators I watch on youtube - there's definitely a line where it could get overbearing, but for the most part it's pretty easy to skip if you want and the brand they're shilling still gets shown to you over and over again so the advertisers aren't really losing out).
(Also chiming in with the "I do pay for YouTube premium" gang as well).
It's grotesque that they think this is an ideal way to promote fan appreciation. I mean, the music styles don't even sync: You could be listening to Bach, with a playback history that clearly shows a preference for classical music, and some idiotic teen pop song by some attention-desperate, barely known singer starts playing via ad, which if you don't click to skip it (say you're in the kitchen with your hands dirty while listening to your interrupted Bach) will play FULLY for its entire 3 to 4 minute duration. Just bloody stupid...
I'm terrified we're already well on the other side of the Rubicon
I don't know what the return on investment was, I always figured they did it as a way to show that they supported the arts.
Then you get the intro to the show, and sometimes a product spot. Then the show starts, and depending on the format (half hour, multi-part 12 minute, etc) you may get a mid-roll and finally at the end a final sponsor message, plus the studio (like CBS) would pitch other shows on their network, and the star of the show would also have their current movies and other productions pitched at the end, as well.
Check out Richard Rogue on OTRR or archive.org for both styles, the mid-roll and the post-intro roll with jingle, it varies depending on year of production. Their main sponsor was Fitch, as far as i can tell.
So who is benefiting from me watching sponsor segments? Not me, not the content creator, not the brand.
I just skip them manually though tbh, haven't gotten around to automating it.
There are plenty of youtubers who do videos as a hobby with no money and the videos still are amazing. Then there are plenty of youtubers who only make 10 minute videos so they can get as many ad breaks as possible and add sponsor ads in the videos and the video quality and content is just terrible.
Personally I am done with indirect funding models where people burn my time and attention in hopes of getting me to waste enough money on something that surplus cash can be skimmed to pay for the original content. It's ridiculous. Direct payment or GTFO.
And I'm putting my money where my mouth is. My Patreon bill was $150 this month. And that's not counting direct payments to creators.
Nice!
I'm still not using Patreon but I "guilty" of paying for promising alpha quality stuff, subscribing to services I don't use deliberately even after realizing I cannot use it yet etc.
I think we IT people have a reputation for being a bunch of cynical whiners and I also think it is somewhat deserved so I am happy to hear that I am not alone in actually wanting to pay for good stuff.
If anyone wonder what makes me pay, here is the best I can come up with:
- stuff I use or can see myself using
- one time payments, no subscriptions (unless there is a specific ongoing cost that I realized must be there)
- tokens are a nice alternative to subscriptions (eg: $10 for 50 tokens that let me start multi-player games is something I would easily consider for a good game like Polytopia)
- not too expensive, once it passes impulse buy at around $10 monthly or $40 one time it gets significantly harder bjt not impossible
Personally I just use adblock, skip the sponsor segments and live with it. Sponsor stuff is really easy to skip in my experience, especially on mobile where if you double tap the right side it skips 10 seconds. You get used to how many taps to do per content creator, their sponsor segments seem to be consistent lengths usually.
Merch, it depends. I've grabbed some tshirts here and there that are comfy and not branded all to hell, couple of random knick knacks. A lot of it is indeed not appealing, so I mostly just send money.
doesn't youtube premium give GOOGLE a revenue stream?
[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/YoutubeMusic/comments/8s1b70/does_y...
I find the same with christmas adverts each year - I don’t do tv, but go out of my way to watch the adverts and get in the festive mood come December.
And that is ho... 'HEY! Don't forget to check out X!' is not
I am personally wondering if Yourube themselves are going to start implementing some thing like this sooner or later; after all, you are paying for an ad free experience on YouTube premium, just to watch all of those new videos become filled with in-video advertisements.
Unlikely. It requires monitoring content and ensuring they people add (correct) timestamps for sponsored content. This would need to be verified by YouTube moderators and in general requires a lot more resources than you think. Crowdsourcing like SponsorBlock is feasible but it's unlikely that YouTube will integrate SponsorBlock into the site.
YouTube needs to make a way for creators to label the sponsor sections and it skips it for Premium users.
As for why downloading, I download any/every video I find useful so I don’t have to go back to YouTube to watch it later. Everything from blender tutorials to car build videos that taught me something to music video clips and generally just anything interesting. It all goes to my NAS and I can instantly pull it up for reference and scrub quicker and don’t have to deal with YouTube’s increasingly annoying website.
I have read that more and more creators use sponsored segments because that pays much better than YT revshare..
So they may not care about the Premium user experience as much, and if Premium lets people skip sponsored segements, that might drive down the overall segment viewership, AND increase Premium subscribers and then it's a lose-lose for the creator since those segments will be less and less valuable to the sponsor.
If YouTube made it more appealing to buy Premium, eg by letting you block sponsored segments, download videos easily, etc etc... everyone would win.
While I’m sure it’s different for every creator I would be curious to see the math.
But you may be right.
I have to imagine it wouldn't be long before some clever sponsor offers extra money not to mark their sections...
Once a significant (number && percentage) of users report it kt is flagged,
- first to the creator
- and then shortly afterwards - if the creator does not either fix it or verify it - to a review team or even to a customer panel
Some logic can be applied to filter out abuses of the system by:
- looking for reports by new viewers of this channel (brigading)
- dismissing / less weighting for people who have previously attempted to abuse the report button
- look at the clustering of reports in time
I'm just pointing out that this should be the job of the premium team at YouTube, not left to subscribers.
so:
- Sponsorskip is a good solution to a problem that shouldn't exist
- If YouTube cared they could make this an even better experience and make sure both honest producers, paying customers and sponsors got a better deal. Today the revenue maximizing play seems to be to add sponsors on top of premium and hope advertisers doesn't realize they are being skipped.
Maybe there had been less enthusiasm around such projects though if they didn't have legitimate uses?
but if you are like me and watch a lot of curated playlists, you end up watching the same sponsor segments over and over.
it's like watching anime on primevideo without hitting the skip intro button
it gets annoying pretty soon.
That, or post-scarcity to finally happen, whichever cones first :).
I would be fine with adblock that fakes that I saw the ad without me having to wait for it to buffer.
All marketing is bad. It's essentially mindhacking.
> I want indie people to make enough money to produce high quality content
If people have something to say, they will say it whether they get paid for it or not. That's what I want. Real opinions from real people. Not some sponsored content you can't trust is real.
> otherwise media is just what a few biggies want to fund
It already is. All they have to do to lose funding is say or do something those sponsors don't like.
As for what sponsored content people are streaming: where I live Internet providers provide unlimited bandwidth during off peak hours (midnight to 8AM) but give you a monthly data limit outside those hours. If you are in an area not wired for high-speed internet, you might be relying on 4G which can have a monthly limit of as little as 50 GB… which isn’t much at all for a family. So it’s nice to be able to queue up all the videos you want to watch to download overnight, making the answer “everything/anything.”
(And that is the chief use of YouTube-DL for me. YouTube premium lets you save videos to watch offline, but only on mobile devices —- which typically have little storage for them —- and you can’t schedule it, you’d have to get up at midnight to manually select each video. With YouTube-DL I can schedule downloads of all my subscriptions and bookmarks to a nice big hard drive and then automatically put my PC to sleep.)
How many youtubers have you seen shilling out raid shadow legends? They all praise it like it's the next coming of Jesus while everyone knows that the game is absolute garbage.
How many times will I get ad for NordVPN? Why would I use such a widely known and blocked VPN for streaming services? It is literal noob trap.
Worst is the reybud or whatever ear buds. Everyone says how good they sound and how amazing they are, but realistically if a brand comes out of nowhere with no other products what are the chances that they are good or even decent?
All of these are terrible sponsor ads for me. All they do is annoy me and waste my time. At least many video makers I follow have the decency to somehow indicate in the video how long the ad will go on so it is easier to skip. Only reason I don't use the automatic extension is that anyone can mark any segment of any video as an ad and it will be automatically skipped and I don't like that idea. Maybe if it was just some friends who I trust.
Well, yes. Skipping involves effort. If I wanted to engage my hands with the content, I would've opted for a book, not a video.
Anyway, actual sponsor parts I can stand. They're at least somewhat interesting, by virtue of being unexpected. Like, who is this video sponsored by this time? Or, why this well-known and otherwise respected science/technology video vlogger keeps advertising scummy VPN services?
What I can't stand is the "like and subscribe" dance. It's just completely mind-dumbing. Yes, I know you have a Patreon, it's in the video description. Yes, I know where the stupid "bell icon" is, I don't need unsolicited YouTube UI 101 lessons. No, I'm not going to click anyway, because I'm here for a particular video, not the whole channel.
Perhaps more importantly, would you give them money?
> what are they supposed to do if they want to earn money (or even a living) making videos that will make you happy
Make me happy? It's simple: don't do videos for a living. If you have something interesting to say, say it, and put a PayPal link (or Patreon, if you discover that you regularly have something interesting to say). If you don't have anything interesting to say, just don't do the video. I'm not gonna watch it anyway.
But that's just me, really. There's no good answer to your question, because for me, the moment a YouTuber wants to do videos in order to make money (or a living), I don't want to watch them anymore. Under the current system, they're creating a huge conflict of interest for themselves - monetizing views through advertising is in direct opposition to delivering quality and trustworthy content. Almost all ways to improve engagement degrade the value delivered to the viewer.
I'd be more comfortable with creators doubling down on Patron and one-time donations. Even the merch[0]. "I make this stuff for as long as I can afford it, want to help, send me money" is a honest deal. So is a paywall, but that's tougher to implement on the Internet.
> Perhaps more importantly, would you give them money?
Yes, I would and I do. I subscribe to a bunch of Patreons, occasionally buy stuff from creators or send them direct donations. But not for everything, of course. That's the nature of the market. A random video I got linked to is worth $0 to me until I finish watching it, and after I'm done, it's hard to price.
--
[0] - Though I seldom buy any, and really dislike the concept. Most merch is a waste of matter and energy used to create it; it exists only to break through people's reluctance to spend money on intangible content, but at the cost of most money being lost in making and shipping stuff that will end up in a landfill after a short dust-gathering break at some viewer's home. I hate these sorts of "hacks" for human psyche, but I see why they're needed.
There's also a conflict of interest here too - the videos could become just a vector for peddling merch. But so far, I haven't seen any YouTube creator falling into that trap - unlike ad monetization, which affects everyone.
This also goes for channels with well over 1M subscribers. I honestly have a hard time believing they're struggling to make a living (but I haven't seen the numbers).
Worst of all, the sponsorships tend to be for some scammy VPN or gacha, even when it comes to creators who otherwise create high-quality content.
It depends. Some Creators get pretty creative with their sponsor blocks. JayzTwoCents comes to mind with his "iFixit" ad - it's hilarous every time it appears.
I also watch some meme compilations with my SO and they're usually pretty different. I appreciate that compiling those memes into one video is for the convenience of the viewer but the original video creators don't benefit from those, only the ones making the compilations so I don't want to support that. On top of that, there are some channels that have several minutes long product ads inside the video, not the normal YouTube adverts. I simply hate those.
Then I started using[1] SponsorBlock, and now we're back at square 0.
[1]: I had known about it for a long time but didn't feel like using it, until I did (or you can see it as "they made me feel like using it"...)
That said, for this stuff, I've only downloaded audio, and of that mostly talking head type stuff, where I let it cut out the segments. Whatever re-encoding is done would have to be pretty bad before I'd care.
$ yt-dlp -x --sponskrub --sponskrub-cut "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7vPNcnYWQ4"
[youtube] _7vPNcnYWQ4: Downloading webpage
[youtube] _7vPNcnYWQ4: Downloading android player API JSON
[info] _7vPNcnYWQ4: Downloading 1 format(s): 251
[download] Destination: Making an unpickable lock. Calling locksmiths [_7vPNcnYWQ4].webm
[download] 100% of 12.72MiB in 00:00
[ExtractAudio] Destination: Making an unpickable lock. Calling locksmiths [_7vPNcnYWQ4].opus
Deleting original file Making an unpickable lock. Calling locksmiths [_7vPNcnYWQ4].webm (pass -k to keep)
[SponSkrub] Trying to remove sponsor sections
WARNING: Cutting out sponsor segments will cause the subtitles to go out of sync.
[libopus @ 0x5462c20] No bit rate set. Defaulting to 96000 bps.
size= 3515kB time=00:04:33.53 bitrate= 105.3kbits/s speed= 26x
[SponSkrub] Trying to remove sponsor sections
WARNING: Cutting out sponsor segments will cause the subtitles to go out of sync.
[libopus @ 0x5575420] No bit rate set. Defaulting to 96000 bps.
frame= 51 fps=8.5 q=0.0 size= 1kB time=00:00:01.95 bitrate= 3.5kbits/s speed=0.326xMake sure to read the note at the bottom of changelog, since some options have changed
Also here is a fork of NewPipe with SponsorBlock functionality.[0]
> Cookies from browser: Cookies can be automatically extracted from all major web browsers using --cookies-from-browser BROWSER[:PROFILE]
Very nice. Having to manually copy cookies to get past login walls is annoying.
Why don't OSes have some sort of system-wide secret store linked to an user's account (like the macOS Keychain) and an application's code-signing certificate? That would at least prevent easy file-dump attacks, moving the barrier to "execute something in the browser process context" instead.
There might be a more modern and streamlined solution for Linux, but in Windows land they also introduced Controlled Folder Access into defender.
Your reasoning makes zero sense. You can keep the platform strong and still keep some information safe, no?
WTF HN
It's enough that I already can't read the data that's being sent and received by my own computer, because of certificate pinning.
2. Once malware is running as your user, how do you expect to protect against that even with a keychain? They can log all your keystrokes, extract certificates and keys from applications running as your user or anything your user has access to, etc.
3. How are you going to support different keychains on different OSes? And what happens when they diverge? Say Apple gets "brave" again and allows only Apple signed binaries to access the keychain with the excuse of "user security", will binaries have to roll their own keychain? Are you going to make apps add another corporate dependency?
A kernel-backed mechanism could enforce that access to the secret decryption syscalls can only be done from untampered signed processes.
Assuming an user has a distinct login password they are not using anywhere else and the public key of the codesign certificate is part of the kernel-side secret, a malware has no chance of getting access to the secret, unless it exploits a code execution vulnerability in the target program.
> How are you going to support different keychains on different OSes?
A minimal interface with three calls: 1) create/delete a kernel-side secret, 2) encrypt a secret using a key derived from the user's keychain and the application's public key, 3) decrypt a secret using said key.
Android brings such an API (KeyStore), macOS' Keychain should support something like that via its ACL feature. Where additional work is needed is Windows (its DPAPI only protects secrets from other users, apps can get other apps' secrets by design to implement SSO) and Linux (which doesn't have any way to verify in the kernel if an application has a code signature).
Browsers and other apps wishing to protect secrets from malware could use an abstraction layer that uses the best available mechanism on each platform, the three operations should be enough for this purpose.
And have a look at AppArmor.
[1] https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/blob/master/yt_dlp/cookies....
chr_cookies = pycookiecheat.chrome_cookies('https://example.com')
session = requests.Session()
for k, v in cookies.items():
session.cookies.set(k, v, domain='.example.com')yt-dlc's last commit was only 4 days ago, from the project owner. What are the advantages of each, and what about other forks out there?
The previous update was July 25, and the one before that was December 2020.
While the July update dealt with the updater, having 2 days of small changes since December is not very active.
As far as the advantages, there are plenty of comments now outlining them better than I could. For me there are many additional sites that work with yt-dlp that do not work with the other forks. I found myself using this fork more and more instead of youtube-dl due to the additional support, until I've now made it my default. It does have a compat mode so if you use a lot of youtube-dl switches that yt-dlp may of removed or depreciated in the cleanup, they will still usually work if applicable with this fork as well.
Admittedly, that question is made in bad faith -- I know what you mean, even if what you mean isn't necessarily "sandboxing": permissions!
Android and iOS do it right. One OS-level source of truth that manages application-level permissions for the entire machine. When you frame it that way, it becomes clear that Deno asking for rights on a per-run basis is indeed silly, but only in the context of the user experience... not necessarily the core software design.
This yt-dlp fork has a workaround (though not a true fix) for the issue: https://github.com/ytdl-org/youtube-dl/issues/29326#issuecom...
Here's some coverage from the EFF, in case you missed it: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/11/github-reinstates-yout...
Just seems a case of the same what usually happens: main author loses interest, has other stuff to do, etc. and no one really takes up the slack.
https://github.com/database64128/youtube-dl-wpf
Currently it's WPF based and therefore only supports Windows. I'm considering porting it to Avalonia so I can also use it on my Linux desktop.
The reason I made this GUI is mostly for manual format selection. The automatic 'bestvideo+bestaudio/best' doesn't always result in the best format combination. So I always select AV1 + Opus manually and use the WebM container. The GUI also includes some opinionated defaults like embedding metadata, thumbnail, subtitles.
- The extractors part (all the scrappers basically)
- The cli tool
What would be wonderful is that the extractors part is splitted out, so that anyone can use it without using youtube-dl. That would be much easier to update it too, each extractor is independent, so it is only a question, does this scrapper (extractor) works or not.
The next step would be to have a multi-language format to describe a scrapper, instead of being coded in Python. But no idea if this is possible or maybe that would make things much more complex
Extractors regularly require custom logic, so they can’t be described in anything else than a programming language.
The fact that some requires custom logic doesn't prove that you need a programming language, it is just custom logic compared to the standard framework.
china might want to disagree
totally forgot about india
What is benefit of setting my credentials to the config file?
alias yt-mp3='yt-dlp --extract-audio --audio-format mp3 --split-chapters --no-check-certificate'
alias youtube-mp3='youtube-dl --extract-audio --audio-format mp3 '
alias youtube-mp4='youtube-dl -f "bestvideo[ext=mp4]+bestaudio[ext=m4a]/mp4"'
alias youtube-mp4-480p='youtube-dl -f "bestvideo[height<=480]+bestaudio/best[height<=480]"'
alias youtube-playlist='youtube-dl -f "bestvideo[ext=mp4]+bestaudio[ext=m4a]/mp4" -ciw -o "%(title)s.%(ext)s" -v '
#alias ffmpeg-mkv=find . -type f -name "*.mkv" -exec bash -c 'FILE="$1"; ffmpeg -i "${FILE}" -vn -c:a libmp3lame -y "${FILE%.mkv}.mp3";' _ '{}' \;
#alias ffmpeg-webm=find . -type f -iname "*.webm" -exec bash -c 'FILE="$1"; ffmpeg -i "${FILE}" -vn -ab 128k -ar 44100 -y "${FILE%.webm}.mp3";' _ '{}' \;
#alias ffmpeg-mp3=find . -type f -iname "*.mp4" -exec bash -c 'FILE="$1"; ffmpeg -i "${FILE}" -vn -y "${FILE%.mp4}.mp3";' _ '{}' \;still get k's of downloads a day even though its been 15yrs since the last update
Triply so if it's hosted by a corporation.
Looking at you, Microsoft. For all the good[0] things you're doing for developers using your platforms, I'm still angry at the way your documentation links rot. It seems that everything that ever linked to MSDN prior to ~2015 will now have their links redirected to 404 or "buy new Surface" page. Hell, plenty of internal links are broken too. It's particularly apparent when trying to read about C++ and COM (vs. C#/.NET, which seems to be MS's main focus).
--
[0] - In a pragmatic, day-to-day dev experience sense. Explicitly not talking about wider ethical issues here.
2) When Internet is flaky or doesn't exist. I've downloaded whole sets of tutorial videos for example to watch on a plane.
3) Stuff in 4K where my video player does a better job with hardware acceleration than my web browser does
I mean out of all the video I watch from the internet, 95% is streaming, but youtube-dl is for that other 5% that falls into the three categories above.
A great example I recently saw is someone extracting the audio feed and double checking the Doppler shift of a passing quadcopter to confirm a speed claim. It checked out and the math was included. Stellar comment. Harder to do if obtaining the video's data is made hard.
I started when a group I listened to removed all the content they had put up over the past year and said it was promotional material for their latest album which was garbage.
Ads have gotten so bad that any videos over three minutes have multiple ad breaks so watching longer music videos or sets are just completely ruined when watching on YouTube.
I wish there was a good set up for single watch videos since the ad algorithm tries to anticipate good places for breaks, which often times is right before punch lines to joke and when you skip over the ad they tend to put you back a few milliseconds ahead of where you stopped which can ruin jokes. I rarely watch for enjoyment (as opposed to learning) on a computer so I don't get the benefit of using an ad blocker like Ad Nauseam.
Theres tons of place without internet access, or I dont have a device with internet access.
Watching many high res videos without destroying phone data plan.
It's a shame that the only video links on HN seem to be from Youtube.
1. I download whole channels if there's a series I want to watch.
2. I download music, since youtube is a really quite nice music library.
3. I download long videos before I watch it, because it's just more pleasant to rewind the thing when it's already on your SSD. Also, it won't freeze spoiling a beautiful scene because of some stupid WiFi problem.
4. Even if I don't download it before watching, I still use mpv to watch it, which uses youtube-dl internally, because mpv is a much nicer video-player than what you can have in a browser.
And I'm sure I forgot some important use-cases. Browsers are evil, js-apps are stupid, don't use them, if you can.
mpv itself uses ytdl (or others) for accessing streming sites and will buffer the whole vid if you crank up cache settings like:
cache=yes
demuxer-max-bytes=5G
demuxer-max-back-bytes=5G
prefetch-playlist=yes
force-seekable=yesWe maintain a central list [1] of content that various members have archived, such that when content is removed from YouTube, people can direct inquiries to contributors who have archived that content.
It's a small way to keep track of what things have been successfully archived, and occasionally direct efforts to preserve specific content.
mpv --ytdl-format="best[height<=720]" "$URL"Darn...unfortunately still can't download Joe Rogan Spotify. Guess they haven't found a way around the widevine encryption...(Right now it seems like only a few podcasts are encrypted so other Spotify streams work)
How does this work?
Yes.
>You can still use a third party tool to screen record right?
The third-party tool is as stymied by the OS / video driver's API for screen capture as the first-party tool.
--
[0] - Or at least almost entirely, I suspect at least the kernel must get involved somehow. Otherwise Widevine support wouldn't be an issue on Linux the way it is (or was).
Most things still work but support of different services is something that needs daily updates to not break. Even if most popular websites still work, pages like Newgrounds are breaking.
There's 3.7k open issues right now and nothing gets merged [0].
Why not ask for maintainership if you need it?
I'm currently happy with NewPipe - which is essentially a youtube-dl GUI, and has to be updated just as often, which is damn annoying because FDroid is still completely broken UX-wise - but I have less tech-savvy people around me, who would very much like an alternative to the official YouTube app.
youtube-dl is up-to-date (2021.06.06)However, there is an open pull request for it from just a few hours ago https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-core/pull/84049
So here's to hoping it'll be available there soon :D
Unless something is completely unavailable elsewhere, you'll find far better audio quality from other (original) sources.
I can't imagine trying to source this stuff independently and keeping up with it, and if some commercial music crept in I imagine it'd be easier to simply stay on YT and ask what level of quality one subjectively needs for dental drilling, or mindless work, or throne-in-lair-sitting, or whatever it is...
I do run into this from time to time. Let's say I want the soundtrack to one of my favourite anime, from 2006.
Some items from it are also on the source game soundtrack, so are available on iTunes. This is actually kind of rare for older anime which usually don't bother releasing in iTunes outside Japan, but being a game adaptation helps it here, I guess. Still, anything composed for the anime are not included.
Some of it is there on Spotify. Actually, at one point it all was, and I can still see the tracks are there but grayed out in other people's playlists, so I assume there exists some region in which it was available, and the availability in my region initially was a mistake by a licensee who forgot to limit it to the regions they had rights for. Either way, it's no longer legally available for me.
So I could.... VPN to Japanese iTunes, thereby breaking the terms of service, (assuming it's still there) or I could try import some decade old special edition DVDs of the anime which contained the OST.
Or I could rip it from YouTube. Eventually, if you make no effort to sell to me, I'm going to resort to other options.
In my experience, you'd immediately enter "vacation mode", which is limited to two weeks in free version, but unlimited in premium. Spotify doesn't even complain when you switch countries in a couple of seconds. They're very lenient on enforcement, I've used it for like five years before Spotify actually became available in my country (though I couldn't pay for the premium with a card from a different country). Just log in via VPN once, then it works for two weeks.
The quality is usually pretty bad, it’s true. But in many cases, this stuff is almost impossible to buy even if you wanted to, so YouTube is your only option.
YT is also fairly unpleasant to use, which is why a lot of people go for youtube-dl.
The question, especially for the folks around here.
When Github eventually takes a stronger stand against this sort of thing, because it is 100% going to happen, are folks going to properly fight it?
Whether it's a matter of principles or just the bad press from the initial takedown is less clear, but I think it'll be a while before they re litigate this issue.
I can't imagine that ever happening. But what I can imagine is the media groups giving Microsoft a hard time on whatever deals they have in the Xbox ecosystem, pressuring until GitHub unilaterally reverses their reversal, or does something else to satisfy them.
I suppose I should be a bit clearer. When Microsoft and the big media people get together to try to make it go away, what will be the the response?
I hope so. I would really like to see git hosting as a Tor hidden service.