So, starting now, Google started mandating full JS for YT, effectively breaking all third-party clients and locking the site to their official client.

This reeks of DRM.

UPDATE: Installing Deno and installing yt-dlp through PyPi fixes yt-dlp but the very idea that Google is mandating JS to lock down YT in an attempt at pseudo-DRM is still crappy.

UPDATE #2: inv.nadeko.net is working again for now.

  •  null_dot   ( @null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    63
    ·
    2 months ago

    invidious, yt-dlp, and freetube have broken so many times for me over the last 6 months, I’ve fallen out of the habit of using YT lately anyway.

    It sucks because there is content there that I want but I’m not going to whore myself for it.

    • Thank you! Ffs, I was just sitting here thinking, I am not paying ticketmaster a damn dime, even if I have to miss my childhood heroes before they die. People whore themselves out and it fucks all of society constantly. Can’t watch videos because of content monopoly, can’t see a concert without getting fucked on exorbitant fees, can’t go to the hospital because holy fuck, can’t go to school without crippling debt, can’t watch TV without supporting terrorists, etc. Like bloody hell the corpos have monopolized and ruined everything. They can go to hell. I’ll play my shitty guitar, sing to myself, do home surgery, and go outside or stare at a wall. Fuck this shit!

      •  DFX4509B   ( @DFX4509B_2@lemmy.org ) OP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        2 months ago

        You still have alternative platforms to Big Tech though, PeerTube and Odysee like have been mentioned umpteen times in this thread and on Lemmy at large, and not to mention Lemmy itself, and Mastodon, Pixelfed, and Bsky among others.

            •  0xtero   ( @0xtero@beehaw.org ) 
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              2 months ago

              They’re still running on VC money so it’ll be a while. My guess: ads, selling user data, AI training on user behaviours, limiting what content is suitable (getting rid of NSFW), promoting corporate brands (so algorithmic advertising) and adding crypto in one way or another. And all the other tricks that older platforms have been doing.

              And probably burying the thought of distributed protocol, hoping people will stop talking about it.

        •  Auli   ( @Auli@lemmy.ca ) 
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          Sure but they don’t have the content and don’t have staying power. If peertube became popular who is going to pay for the bandwidth.

          •  Lime Buzz (fae/she)   ( @SweetCitrusBuzz@beehaw.org ) 
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Its users, in part because it uses web torrent which means the traffic of videos is shared peer-to-peer, thus the host doesn’t have to pay for a lot of bandwidth.

            Also, just like mastodon servers are paid by its users for service I’m sure admins that build up a good reputation with their users or make them aware that they need more to pay for it will pay, or not and they’ll just disappear which is really how the web should work, not all these tech oligarchs who have lots of money from exploiting their users and workers.

            Edit: Was incorrect, it uses HLS with P2P support:

            At the beginning of PeerTube, we only supported Web Video (previously known as “WebTorrent”) streaming. Due to several limitations of the Web Video system, we had to add HLS with P2P support.

            •  null_dot   ( @null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) 
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              I’m not an expert on these things but I just don’t like the idea of web torrent.

              I do however, whole heartedly agree that video producers should pay for their own bandwidth, and be supported by users.

                •  null_dot   ( @null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) 
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  IDK really.

                  I don’t dislike it in a “this is terrible technology and no one should be doing it” kind of a way. Just in a “I feel a bit icky about this” kind of way.

                  There must be privacy considerations right? Do I really want everyone to know what videos I’m watching?

                  Also, do I really want my client to be providing n upstream connections grinding away at my battery?

                  They’ve probably long since solved this I guess but in the early days firefox wasn’t supported ?

                  I just… don’t feel like this is the solution to the cost of delivering content.

              • Seems you are correct, I thought webtorent was the only way to have peer-to-peer video, but seems not:

                At the beginning of PeerTube, we only supported Web Video (previously known as “WebTorrent”) streaming. Due to several limitations of the Web Video system, we had to add HLS with P2P support.

                That’s pretty cool, thanks for the information!

    •  0xtero   ( @0xtero@beehaw.org ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      2 months ago

      I doubt it. Bandwidth and storage costs for distributed video on the scale of YouTube isn’t going to happen without some kind of monetisation beyond stray donations.

      Places like Nebula have better operating models but they’re also very niche.

      • on the scale of YouTube

        That’s precisely the trick. Don’t try to copy Youtube. You’re gonna lose. And it’s not the Peertube intended use case anyway.

        Instead, Peertube and other such platforms should work as cross-indexing domain-specific, configuration-specific video galleries. A retro videogame video archive does not need 4K 120fps Dobly 14.3 audio; they can just encode most of everything in 480i 30fps and their storage costs will go down significantly. A news report / news reel archive can save some costs by encoding as SDR (or even lower) with ~80kbps mono MP3 audio or somesuch, since most of everything past the intro jingle is human voice.

        Play to your advantages. Trying to break into a monopoly game where the rules are broken, the only other player is broken, and the entry fees are broken is self-defeating.

        •  0xtero   ( @0xtero@beehaw.org ) 
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          should work as cross-indexing domain-specific, configuration-specific video galleries

          Yes indeed - this is great idea and probably the only way a “web scale” distributed video service can work - unfortunately this doesn’t quite exist yet. Even mature implementations like Mastodon have hard time dealing with “global” free text searching (or any kind of taxonomy). But maybe that’s the idea that starts a truly free web!

        •  DFX4509B   ( @DFX4509B_2@lemmy.org ) OP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          A news report / news reel archive can save some costs by encoding as SDR (or even lower) with ~80kbps mono MP3 audio or somesuch, since most of everything past the intro jingle is human voice

          • Opus would have MP3 beat for speech at lower bitrates as per the HydrogenAudio KB, Opus is transparent for speech at 32kbit/s with stereo speech being transparent at 40kbit/s. Beyond that, a typical bitrate for Opus audio on YT is something like 150kbit/s and that codec is transparent for music at 160-192kbit/s. Point being if one works in spoken word and they want to save as much space and bandwidth as possible while still sounding reasonable, 40-48kbit/s Opus would be the ideal audio codec for that as it would give transparent speech at half the bitrate of the 80kbit/s MP3 that’s quoted here.
            •  DFX4509B   ( @DFX4509B_2@lemmy.org ) OP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              To directly quote the HydrogenAudio KB article on Opus:

              • 32kbit/s CELT encoding gives you: Essentially transparent speech plus moderately good stereo music
              • 40kbit/s CELT encoding gives you: Essentially transparent mono or stereo speech, fairly good stereo music
              • 48kbit/s CELT encoding gives you: Essentially transparent mono or stereo speech, reasonable music

              You’re getting basically transparent speech at a bit over half the bitrate of 80kbit/s MP3 or less, and even with music, Opus like I said is transparent for music at 160-192kbit/s according to the same KB article I’m quoting, while MP3 needs 320kbit/s CBR for transparency for music, although if I’m transcoding FLAC files to Opus, I normally just max out the codec at 510kbit/s where MP3’s transparency bitrate of 320kbit/s is also the bitrate it maxes out at.

              The only good reason IMO why one should use MP3 in 2025 when better codecs exist, both lossy and lossless, is when the device they’re targeting is so old or crappy that it can’t support anything better than MP3.

        •  rumba   ( @rumba@lemmy.zip ) 
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Sell ads, pay for storage and transmission fees, pay a pittance to the creators.

          Vs

          Require a single person to finance everything and hope for enough donations to keep running, no incentivization for content creation.

          Peertube is missing a couple of things to even be reasonably viable.

  • I just downloaded MKBHD’s iPhone Air review, and it played perfectly. 1920p whatever that means (somewhere north of 1440p but not quite 2160p… or 2160p/4K but slightly letterboxed). AV1 (Ay-Vee-Wun, not Ay-Vee-Eye), 30fps… looks and sounds great.

    Glad to see the community fixed it fast.

    I use jdownloader2 which probably uses yt-dl on the back end. But it also downloads from a metric fuckton of other sites, too. It’s like the Swiss Army knife of downloaders. And it’s Java, so it runs just as well on my Mac as it did on Windows back when I used that. (Wish they had an official dark theme that was easy to set up though. I know how to do it manually but can’t be arsed.)