How Google fights Invidious (a privacy YouTube Front end)
github.com
github.com
(Nobody else does either, can’t even have an allowed-apps list on Apple TV, it’s all-or-nothing with totally useless rating restrictions instead, this is the main thing parents need and nobody wants to provide it)
A quick search reads like you need third party launchers to block/allow specific apps, anyway. Seems like asking for even more jankiness, but at least it’s an option.
is there any that support such a list?
i could see a possibility to add such a feature to eg freetube
I would love an allowlist proxy-site (like invidious) that I could redirect most YouTube requests in my house to, but I’ve not seen any that support that.
get () {
FILENAME="%(uploader)s/%(title)s/%(title)s (%(upload_date)s).%(ext)s"
yt-dlp \
--restrict-filenames \
--no-check-certificate \
--verbose \
--download-archive "/volume1/Media/youtube/archive.log" \
-i \
--write-thumbnail \
--convert-thumbnails jpg \
--force-ipv4 \
--add-metadata \
--write-auto-sub \
--sub-lang en \
--write-sub \
-f "best[height<=1080]" \
--merge-output-format mkv \
-o "/volume1/Media/$1/$FILENAME" \
-v \
--batch-file "/volume1/Media/youtube/$2"
}
get "youtube/_Singles" "unique.txt"
get "youtube/_politics" "politics.txt"
get "youtube/_music_videos" "music.txt"
get "youtube/channels" "channels.txt"
get "youtube/channels" "playlists.txt"
exit 0https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp
https://github.com/ytdl-org/youtube-dl
Will also start to feel the impact. My theory is that we will see a bunch of new video hosting sites as youtube itself attempts to lock down its ecosystem. They haven't paid attention in any adversarial way as far as I can tell.
When they do, it wont be great.
If so, that could signal the start of the end for yt-dlp and similar.
Or at least for their hosting on public GitHub and similar places.
i doubt that.
The business of hosting video is not the hosting itself. It's the ad-driven revenue you can derive, which requires eyeballs first.
Youtube's eyeball count is through the roof compared to any new video hosting site. Content creators will not switch off youtube, unless their revenue from this new site is sufficient compared to what they could've gotten from youtube (or they mirror it - in which case, why would anyone go to this new site?).
"Content creators will not switch off youtube, unless their revenue from this new site is sufficient compared to what they could've gotten from youtube (or they mirror it - in which case, why would anyone go to this new site?). "
There are alternatives (e.g. Nebula) and a lot of creators like them and do post their content on them to get a higher revenue share. Youtube is squeezing a lot of them. You tube is also a pretty crap user experience too.
There are also people whose videos are primarily not being found through Youtube, and those are not looking for ad revenues. There are also other business models than a revenue share from Youtube.
The competition that youtube gets is from tiktok, not clones of youtube.
There is hope of it changing slowly.
But, really, it is just part of the centralised internet we now have.
Yes but... (1) Nebula "success" is partially owed to Nebula creators building up audiences on Youtube.
And (2) being on Nebula requires an invitation from that platform to join. You can't just be a random unknown. In contrast, you can be an new unknown creator and start uploading videos to Youtube. Then later, if you're big enough and the quality meets Nebula's standards, they may ask you to join.[1]
Those 2 reasons keep it from being a true "alternative" to Youtube. Nebula is more of an extension platform for the portion of audiences that want to pay extra for longer-form videos of their favorite Youtube creators that happen to be on Nebula.
There are also lots of high-quality Youtube creators (e.g. DIY repair tutorials, etc) who are not on Nebula because it doesn't fit Nebula's "documentary" type of content.
[1] Nebula CEO: >If somebody comes to me and says, “Hey, I’m friends with the creator of this channel and they do really good stuff. I think they would be a good fit,” I will take the call. If I get a cold email from a YouTuber saying, “Hey, I have 100,000 subscribers and I want to be on Nebula,” I don’t reply. : https://www.theverge.com/23076663/nebula-youtube-creator-bus...
Like submitting a new website to multiple places.
I think it's difficult by design. The platforms don't want that, they want the lock-in and switching costs.
seeding other platforms with your content that was meant to be youtube is fine (i'm sure there are tools that could do this already), but the problem is that those new platforms aren't monetized like youtube is.
For a content creator, if they dilute their audience (by saying that their content is available on some other platform), they might have less views on youtube which is the money maker.
ETA: Accessing content on nebula, I have my feed of videos from the creators to which I subscribe and I select videos to watch from there. It's basic but as someone who never got into watching youtube (I bookmarked channels on invidious instances and looked for new videos there) it's pretty good. They're also open to feature requests and are improving the site.
Youtube's value is much more as a payment vehicle than anything else.
Is there a different type of front-end that could be built which still maintains ads or allows you to login to Youtube Premium, but which still gives you control over all the other stuff?
This could be a situation where Nielsen could be the good guy. Let’s use the information we already collected over the last two decades, and information from volunteers to audit those numbers and assign shopping patterns to subject matters and interests instead of individuals. Maybe then I’ll stop getting ads for very expensive, buy-once a-decade items for months after I just bought one. You’d be so much better off advertising accessories to me. Those I will buy and while your ad agency still works for you.
I mean, my subscription's not gonna be worth that much to them, but it's still more than they would earn from me watching ads. Fuck the ad industry.
Pre-roll and mid-roll ads are also getting more common in both YouTube and podcast content as well. I think one tricky thing is reach, YouTube promises a huge potential audience that you don't get syndicating your own RSS feed and residuals don't usually exist for pre/mid-roll ads like they do for YouTube (if you get much longterm growth).
Which was taken from here: https://github.com/LuanRT/YouTube.js/pull/624
Could anybody explain it to me?
Link: https://github.com/rumca-js/Django-link-archive
Demo: https://renegat0x0.ddns.net/apps/catalog
Allows me to add channels, download individual videos, bookmark videos, etc. Uses iframe to display the video.
I have no problems with viewing videos:
- I use ff with adblock
- videos are embedded using no-referrer-when-downgrade policy
I have literally no ads.
There are some drawbacks:
- YouTube may change their policies, change embedding strategies
- To have control over videos, you still have to manually download them
Oh and also porn sites I guess, and what's the advertising worth there vs on youtube
1: https://www.statista.com/statistics/259477/hours-of-video-up...
I'd be perfectly fine with an upload cap if that reduces the hosting cost in any way. But of course that would be against the "groth at any cost" mantra.
I use Firefox and ublock Origin for every other website but I use Chrome/ Clear Skies just for youtube because those dogs are blocking me with Firefox/ublock and even with ublock disabled they are nerfing Firefox by throttling it to make the experience unbearably laggy.
Really wish Neal Mohamed would realize when I’m searching for recipes to cook for dinner I do not wish to see: black head videos, hair lice infestation, CCTV of a Chinese child dying in a faulty elevator, ear cleaning videos in my search results. All of which Neal Mohans algorithm has served me when searching for recipes and I’ve never clicked a single one.
I know its a purpose build in shock video cos it always shows in an extra box that includes 1 video I have watched before, 1 gross out video, 1 mainstream video all unrelated to the search
And personally, I think I may have seen a pimple popping video...once? And I just hit the "not interested in this" button and have never seen one again. Though, I've always made sure to keep my watch history tidy, so the vast majority of recommendations I see are spot-on
They need to build a robust video player ux if they want to compete.
[0]: https://github.com/TeamPiped/Piped
[1]: https://piped.video
Google is holding humanity's cultural heritage hostage and ad-placing the shit out of it.
I wouldn't mind 1 skippable pre-roll ad and the same post-roll. But not 2 and in-between and unskippable. And I'll do anything to block those ads. Google is at war with its users, viewers and creators alike.
It will be a real "don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened" moment when this inevitably happens. Since I won't give them any money out of principle, that will be the end of my days of watching YT.
it uses frida to make dumping l3 keys really easy (start frida, run the script, open firefox, visit a test DRM page, profit??)