[HN Gopher] Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads
        
       Author : phewlink
       Score  : 897 points
       Date   : 2025-09-24 11:41 UTC (11 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (github.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
        
       | progbits wrote:
       | Can anyone explain specifically what the YT code does that the
       | existing python interpreter is unusable and apparently quickjs
       | takes 20 minutes to run it?
       | 
       | Is it just a lot of CPU-bound code and the modern JIT runtimes
       | are simply that much faster, or is it doing some trickery that
       | deno optimizes well?
        
         | progbits wrote:
         | From https://github.com/ytdl-org/youtube-dl/issues/33186
         | 
         | > Currently, a new style of player JS is beginning to be sent
         | where the challenge code is no longer modular but is hooked
         | into other code throughout the player JS.
         | 
         | So it's no longer a standalone script that can be interpreted
         | but it depends on all the other code on the site? Which could
         | still be interpreted maybe but is a lot more complex and might
         | need DOM etc?
         | 
         | Just guessing here, if anyone knows the details would love to
         | hear more.
        
           | zenmac wrote:
           | Yeah that is guess google using spaghetti code to keep their
           | yt moat.
        
           | Chris2048 wrote:
           | Could something like tree-shaking be used to reduce the
           | player code to just the token generating bit? Or does the
           | whole player js change for each video?
        
           | zelphirkalt wrote:
           | Sounds like a really silly way to engineer things, but then
           | again Google has the workforce to do lots of silly things and
           | the cash to burn, so they can afford it.
        
             | Klonoar wrote:
             | It's silly from an engineering perspective, but
             | unfortunately clever from YT's perspective of "how do we
             | complicate this as much as possible".
        
         | ACCount37 wrote:
         | YouTube is mining cry-
         | 
         | I mean, running some unknown highly obfuscated CPU-demanding JS
         | code on your machine - and using its results to decide whether
         | to permit or deny video downloads.
         | 
         | The enshittification will continue until user morale improves.
        
       | adzm wrote:
       | I was surprised they went with Deno instead of Node, but since
       | Deno has a readily available single-exe distribution that removes
       | a lot of potential pain. This was pretty much just a matter of
       | time, though; the original interpreter in Python was a brilliant
       | hack but limited in capability. It was discussed a few years ago
       | for the YouTube-dl project here
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32793061
        
         | nicce wrote:
         | Node does not have the concept of security and isolation like
         | the Deno has. There is maintainer comment in the same thread.
        
           | doctorpangloss wrote:
           | What evidence is there that Deno's "security and isolation"
           | works?
           | 
           | It's their application, yt-dlp can use whatever it wants. But
           | they made their choices for stylistic/aesthetic reasons.
        
             | nicce wrote:
             | What evidence is telling the opposite?
             | 
             | Scripts use V8 isolation, identical to Chrome. What comes
             | to rest, we can only trust or review by ourself, but it is
             | certainly better than nothing in this context.
        
               | arbll wrote:
               | Identical to Chrome except the part where Chrome uses os-
               | level sandboxing on top. V8 exploits are common, Deno
               | sandboxing by itself is not a good idea if you are
               | executing arbitrary code.
        
               | nicce wrote:
               | We are comparing to situation where the alternative is
               | nothing. Maybe we just should remove locks from the doors
               | because someone has lockpicked door somewhere.
        
               | arbll wrote:
               | I never said it was a poor choice in this specific
               | context but propagating the idea that Deno's sandboxing
               | is safe and "basically the same security as chrome" is
               | wrong and can easily do damage the next time someone that
               | has read this thread needs a way to execute untrusted JS.
        
               | nicce wrote:
               | Someone who understands what V8 isolation means, knows
               | that it means process-level memory and garbage
               | collectors. I didn't claim that it includes Chrome's OS
               | sandbox features too.
               | 
               | But the usage of V8 means that Deno must explicitly
               | provide the access (for V8) for networking and filesystem
               | - the foundations for sandboxing are there.
        
         | arbll wrote:
         | The sandboxing features of Deno also seem to have played a role
         | in that choice. I wouldn't overly trust that as a security
         | layer but it's better than nothing.
        
           | CuriouslyC wrote:
           | Deno sandboxing is paper thin, last time I looked they had
           | very simple rules. It's a checkbox feature. If you want
           | isolation use WASM.
        
             | ndjddirbrbrbfi wrote:
             | It doesn't have granularity in terms of what parts of the
             | code have what permission - everything in the same process
             | has the same permission, but aside from that I'm not sure
             | what you mean about it being paper thin. Certainly WASM is
             | a great option, and I think it can facilitate a more
             | nuanced capabilities model, but for cases like this AFAIK
             | Deno should be secure (to the extent that V8 is secure,
             | which Chrome's security depends on).
             | 
             | It being a checkbox feature is a weird way to frame it too,
             | because that typically implies you're just adding a feature
             | to match your competitors, but their main competitors don't
             | have that feature.
             | 
             | In what ways does it fall short? If there are major gaps,
             | I'd like to know because I've been relying on it (for
             | personal projects only myself, but I've recommended it to
             | others for commercial projects).
        
               | CuriouslyC wrote:
               | Last I looked it was just very basic pattern matching
               | allow/deny with no real isolation, and there have been
               | multiple real escapes already. It's better than nothing,
               | and probably good enough for bush league security, but I
               | wouldn't pitch it to my milspec customers.
        
               | yborg wrote:
               | Why are your milspec customers downloading from YouTube?
               | This is the Deno use case being discussed.
        
               | CuriouslyC wrote:
               | Don't be reductive, people reading this aren't going to
               | fence their opinion of Deno to the "use in YTDLP" case.
        
               | arbll wrote:
               | Chrome does not rely exclusively on V8's security or else
               | it would routinely get exploited (See v8 CVEs if you
               | don't believe me). The hard part of browser exploitation
               | today is escaping from the os-level sandbox put on the
               | processes that run each of your tabs.
               | 
               | Trusting Deno's sandboxing by itself isn't a great idea.
               | An attacker only has to wait for the next V8 exploit to
               | drop, probably a question of a few months at worse.
               | 
               | Now like I mentioned above it's probably ok in yt-dlp
               | context, Google isn't going to target it with an exploit.
               | It's still important that folks reading this don't
               | takeaway "deno sandbox safe" and use it the next time
               | they need to run user-supplied JS.
        
             | silverwind wrote:
             | WASM can not run JavaScript unfortunately.
        
               | em-bee wrote:
               | WASM can run a javascript interpreter or compiler. if
               | isolation is the goal, that may even make sense.
        
           | hyperrail wrote:
           | This is the first time I've heard of Deno so I'm only going
           | by their Security & Permissions doc page [1], but it looks
           | like the doc page at the very end recommends using system-
           | level sandboxing as a defense in depth. This suggests that
           | Deno doesn't use system sandboxing itself.
           | 
           | To me this is a bit alarming as IIRC most app runtime
           | libraries that also have this in-runtime-only sandboxing
           | approach are moving away from that idea precisely because it
           | is not resistant to attackers exploiting vulnerabilities in
           | the runtime itself, pushing platform developers instead
           | toward process-level system kernel-enforced sandboxing
           | (Docker containers or other Linux cgroups, Windows
           | AppContainer, macOS sandboxing, etc.).
           | 
           | So for example, .NET dropped its Code Access Security and
           | AppDomain features in recent versions, and Java has now done
           | the same with its SecurityManager. Perl still has taint mode
           | but I wonder if it too will eventually go away.
           | 
           | [1] https://docs.deno.com/runtime/fundamentals/security/
        
             | arbll wrote:
             | Deno is a V8 wrapper, the same JS engine as Chrome.
             | Vulnerabilities are very common there, not necessarily
             | because it's poorly designed but more because there's
             | massive financial incentives in findings them.
             | 
             | This plus what you mentioned is why I would never trust it
             | to run arbitrary code.
             | 
             | Now in the context of yt-dlp it might fine, google isn't
             | going to target them with exploits. I would still prefer if
             | they didn't continue to propagate "DeNo iS SaFe BeCauSe It
             | HaS sAnDbOxInG" because I've seen projets that were
             | actually executing arbitrary JS rely on it thinking it was
             | safe.
        
         | Analemma_ wrote:
         | Keep in mind that yt-dlp doesn't just support YouTube, which--
         | notwithstanding the claims of "all DRM is malware" etc.--
         | probably won't download actively harmful code to your computer:
         | it also supports a huge number of video streaming sites,
         | including some fairly obscure and sketchy ones. Sandboxing in
         | the interpreter that's at least as good as what you'd get in a
         | browser is a must, because by design this is doing untrusted
         | code execution.
        
       | trilogic wrote:
       | No requirements for me. I don't use YT at all :) There are plenty
       | of better alternatives.
        
         | frizlab wrote:
         | until someone shares a video with you
        
         | jamesnorden wrote:
         | Thanks for letting us know!
        
         | VladVladikoff wrote:
         | My brother sent me a long talk on YouTube and pleaded with me
         | to listen to it. Watching was pointless the video was just
         | talking heads sitting in chairs. However you can't just play a
         | video and turn off your phone while listening to the audio on
         | headphones. The mobile browser sleeps and the audio stops. So I
         | used yt-dlp to rip the audio and dropped it into my Plex server
         | to listen to with Prologue. It wasn't even about the ads, I
         | just wanted to do some gardening and listen to something on
         | headphones while I worked, without my phone screen on.
        
           | 4gotunameagain wrote:
           | https://newpipe.net/
           | 
           | You're welcome
        
           | ndriscoll wrote:
           | Firefox Mobile has an extension "Video Background Play Fix"
           | to disable the Page Visibility API anti-feature.
        
           | jaffa2 wrote:
           | on iphone, if you use youtube in the browser in stead of the
           | app (as you should), then you can do background listening if
           | you play the video, lock the phone, unlock the phone, play th
           | video again, lock the phone, unlock the phone, resume play
           | with the media controls, lock the phone.
        
         | exitb wrote:
         | It's obviously not about YT the product, but about YT the
         | content library. I don't think there are better alternatives to
         | that content library.
        
         | blacklion wrote:
         | I'm watching not youtube but video creators. There is no even
         | worse alternative if person you want to watch doesn't publish
         | video on other site.
         | 
         | Maybe, for watching "recommended" stream without any
         | subscriptions there are alternatives (which? I cannot name good
         | ones, anyway), but if you watch your subscription you are bound
         | to platform which contain this subscription. And no, content
         | creators are not interchangeable.
        
         | exe34 wrote:
         | any recommendations?
        
           | trilogic wrote:
           | Dailymotion, Vimeo etc. No ads, no bs it feels like freedom
           | again. And if they change others will replace them.
        
             | exe34 wrote:
             | And how do you watch content on dailymotion and vimeo when
             | the content creators only post them on YouTube?
        
       | piyuv wrote:
       | I'm a paying YouTube premium subscriber. Last weekend, I wanted
       | to download something so I can watch it on my way in the train.
       | The app got stuck at "waiting for download.." on my iPad. Same on
       | iPhone. Restart did not work. I gave up after an hour (30 mins
       | hands on trying stuff, 30 mins waiting for it to fix itself).
       | Downloaded the video using yt-dlp, transferred it to my USB c
       | flash drive, and watched it from that.
       | 
       | Awaiting their "premium cannot be shared with people outside
       | household" policy so I can finally cancel. Family members make
       | good use of ad-free.
        
         | beerandt wrote:
         | Canceled mine after ad-free stopped working on YouTube Kids of
         | all things (on ShieldTV). Was probably a bug, but with
         | practically no customer service options, no real solutions
         | besides cancel.
         | 
         | I was also a holdover from a paying Play Music subscriber, and
         | this was shortly after the pita music switchover to youtube, so
         | it was a last straw.
        
         | masklinn wrote:
         | Even more hilariously, if you upload to YouTube then try to
         | download from your creator dashboard thing (e.g. because you
         | were live-streaming and didn't think to save a local copy or it
         | impacts your machine too much) you get some shitty 720p render
         | while ytdlp will get you the best quality available to clients.
        
           | hmstx wrote:
           | Oh, that reminds me of a similar experience with Facebook
           | video. Did a live DJ stream a few years ago but only recorded
           | the audio locally at max quality. Back then, I think I
           | already had to use the browser debugger to inspect the url
           | for the 720p version of the video.
           | 
           | When they recently insisted by email I download any videos
           | before they sunset the feature, their option only gave me the
           | SD version (and it took a while to perform the data export).
        
         | shantara wrote:
         | I'm another Premium user in the same position. I use uBlock
         | Origin and Sponsorblock on desktop and SmartTube on my TV. I
         | pay for Premium to be able to share ad-free experience with my
         | less technical family members, and to use their native iOS
         | apps. If they really tighten the rules on Premium family
         | sharing, I'll drop the subscription in an instant.
        
           | al_borland wrote:
           | I'm a Premium user and primarily watch on AppleTV. A little
           | while ago they added a feature where if I press the button to
           | skip ahead on the remote when a sponsor section starts, it
           | skips over the whole thing. It skips over "commonly skipped"
           | sections.
           | 
           | While it doesn't totally remove it, it lets me choose if I
           | want to watch or not, and gets me past it in a single button
           | press. All using the native app. I was surprised the first
           | time this happened. I assume the creators hate it.
        
         | cactusplant7374 wrote:
         | Why not use Brave browser and their playlist feature for
         | offline downloads?
        
           | piyuv wrote:
           | I'm not using brave browser so did not know it could download
           | videos
        
             | QuantumNomad_ wrote:
             | I'm using Brave, but didn't know either :p
        
           | pcdoodle wrote:
           | Nice, didn't know Brave could do that.
        
           | godelski wrote:
           | > Why not use Brave browser
           | 
           | Why not use a non-chromium browser and help prevent Google
           | from having larger control over the Internet?
           | 
           | We still need competition in the browser space or Google gets
           | to have a disproportionate say in how the Internet is
           | structured. I promise you, Firefox and Safari aren't that
           | bad. Maybe Firefox is a little different but I doubt it's
           | meaningfully different for _most_ people [0]. So at least get
           | your non techie family and friends onto them and install an
           | ad blocker while you 're at it.
           | 
           | [0] the fact that you're an individual may mean you're not
           | like most people. You being different doesn't invalidate the
           | claim.
        
             | cactusplant7374 wrote:
             | Firefox is in decline and Brave will soon overtake it.
             | Brave blocks ads natively. There is a lot of advantage in
             | that but we also may eventually have a new model that funds
             | the internet. And I don't see Firefox or Safari disrupting
             | advertising.
             | 
             | https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity
             | 
             | https://brave.com/transparency/
        
               | godelski wrote:
               | I think you've missed the point entirely.
               | 
               | The point is that if everyone is using a single browser
               | (not just Chrome/Chromium) then that actor gets
               | disproportionate control over the internet. That's not
               | good for anyone.
               | 
               | The specific gripe to Chromium is that __Google__ gets
               | that say, and I think they are less trustworthy than
               | other actors. I 'm not asking anyone to trust Mozilla,
               | but anyone suggesting Mozilla is less trustworthy than
               | Google probably has a bridge to sell you. Remember that
               | being Chromium still means that Brave is reliant upon
               | Google. That leads to things like this[0,1]. Remember,
               | the chromium source code is quite large, which is why
               | things like [0] aren't so easily found. I also want to
               | quote a quote from [0.1]                 This is
               | interesting because it is a clear violation of the idea
               | that browser vendors should not give preference to their
               | websites over anyone elses.
               | 
               | That wouldn't be the first time people have found Google
               | preferencing their browser and it is pretty known this
               | happens with YouTube. Do we really want _ANY_ company
               | having such control over the internet? Do we really want
               | _Google_ to?                 >
               | https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity       >
               | https://brave.com/transparency/
               | 
               | I'm not sure what you're trying to tell me here. That
               | Brave has 64% of the number of users as Firefox? That
               | Brave users really like Gemini, Coinbase, and Uphold?
               | That Brave users are linking their Brave account to sites
               | like Twitter, YouTube, Reddit, GitHub, Vimeo, and Twitch?
               | That Brave Ads is tracking via the state level? Honestly
               | I have more questions looking at the Brave "transparency"
               | report, as it seems to have more information about users
               | than Firefox...
               | 
               | If you're extra concerned about privacy and that's your
               | reason for Brave, then may I suggest the Mullvad
               | browser[2]? It is a fork of Firefox and they work with
               | Tor to minimize tracking and fingerprinting. You get your
               | security, privacy, and out from under the boot of Google.
               | 
               | [0] https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/issues/39660
               | 
               | [0.1] https://simonwillison.net/2024/Jul/9/hangout_servic
               | esthunkjs...
               | 
               | [1] https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/google/google-
               | to-kill-...
               | 
               | [2] https://mullvad.net/en/browser
        
               | cactusplant7374 wrote:
               | > I'm not sure what you're trying to tell me here.
               | 
               | I'm telling you that Firefox is going to be out of
               | business soon because users favor ad blocking and
               | blocking trackers. That is the trend. Firefox isn't
               | growing anymore.
               | 
               | > Honestly I have more questions looking at the Brave
               | "transparency" report, as it seems to have more
               | information about users than Firefox...
               | 
               | Metrics can be transmitted without revealing the user.
               | This is well known.
               | 
               | You can't suggest anything. I am done with this
               | conversation.
        
               | bl4kers wrote:
               | That Brave link shows growth has flatlined
        
               | cactusplant7374 wrote:
               | The line isn't of MAU growth.
        
               | jazzyjackson wrote:
               | I'll just throw out there that zen-browser.app is a
               | gentle fork of Firefox to make it look like the
               | (abandoned, chromium) arc browser, it's great.
        
           | Diti wrote:
           | > Why not use Brave
           | 
           | Reddit has the answer for you: https://www.reddit.com/r/brows
           | ers/comments/1j1pq7b/list_of_b...
        
         | femtozer wrote:
         | I also pay for YouTube Premium, but I still use ReVanced on my
         | smartphone just to disable auto-translation. It's absolute
         | madness that users can't configure this in the official app.
        
           | piyuv wrote:
           | It'll be fixed when some product manager can offer it as a
           | promotion project
        
             | ChocolateGod wrote:
             | and removed when that person who is promoted doesn't work
             | on it again
        
             | godelski wrote:
             | I was talking to "my friend" about how I'm annoyed my
             | calendar duplicates holidays because it imports from
             | multiple calendars and he asked me "what value" would be
             | provided if this was solved. Confused I said it pushes
             | things off so I can't read events. He clarified he meant
             | monetary value...
             | 
             | We're both programmers so we're both know we're talking
             | about a one line regex...
             | 
             | I know quite a number of people like this and they're in
             | high positions at big tech companies... doesn't take a
             | genius to figure out why everything has such shitty user
             | experiences and why all the software is so poorly written.
             | No one even seems to care about the actual product they'll
             | only correct you to tell you the product is the stock and
             | the customer is the shareholder, not the user.
             | 
             | We fucked up...
        
               | fragmede wrote:
               | What did you tell him was the monetary value? Let's say
               | there are like 5 holidays per year that result in days
               | where some people have holidays but others do not, so
               | business meetings happen that day that get missed. Let's
               | say you have a 100 million people using this calendar
               | software. Let's say 0.5 percent of those are in the
               | executive class. Furthermore, let's say 10% of them miss
               | a meeting due to this UI issue. That's 50,000 missed
               | meetings. If we handwave that each of those meetings
               | could have resulted in $10 million deals for their
               | company, this UI bug is costing customers _half a
               | trillion dollars_!
               | 
               | So, after estimating the number of ping pong balls that
               | fit on a 747, the thing to do is to go write the regexp
               | and put that on your promo packet. Half a trillion
               | dollars!
        
               | godelski wrote:
               | Sorry, let me clarify better (but it leads to similar
               | issues)
               | 
               | On my iPhone[0] calendar I imported my Microsoft (work)
               | and Google (personal) calendars, also having the iPhone
               | calendar. If we take last Labor day as an example, if I
               | don't disable the Holiday calendars in Microsoft and
               | Google, I have 3 entries for Labor Day. Holidays sit at
               | the top of the day so if I'm on my phone I basically
               | won't see any other events. If I'm on my macbook and my
               | Calendar is using 60% of my vertical space I see "Labor
               | Day +3 more". Full screen I can see 4 maybe 5 entries....
               | 
               | So I can save a large chunk of real estate by doing a
               | simple fucking 1 line regex. At the same time I can
               | effectively merge the calendars, so I get to see the
               | holidays that are in one but not the others.
               | 
               | Effectively, I can ACTUALLY SEE WHAT I HAVE SCHEDULED FOR
               | THE DAY[1]
               | 
               | This, of course, also affects other things. Sometimes
               | Google will add an event because I got an email later.
               | Fuck, now I have dupes... Same thing happens with
               | birthdays... Or you can hit that fun bug where you have
               | for some god damn reason duplicate contacts with the same
               | name, phone number, and birthday, you get triplicate
               | calendar entries and merging[2] and results in quadruple
               | entries!
               | 
               | I have missed so many fucking things because I didn't see
               | it on my calendar[3]. And someone has the audacity to ask
               | how much money would be saved? We've spent longer
               | discussing the problem than it would take to fix it!
               | These aren't junior people I'm talking to (who ask dumb
               | things like "but I can't control or merge the other
               | calendars" not recognizing it's a display issue), but
               | like a L6 at Amazon.[4]                 > So, after
               | estimating the number of ping pong balls that fit on a
               | 747, the thing to do is to go write the regexp and put
               | that on your promo packet.
               | 
               | I swear, the problem is no one realizes the point of
               | leetcode questions was never to get the answers right,
               | but to just have some problem for an interviewee work on
               | and see how they go about solving it. I'd rather an
               | engineer get the wrong answer with a good thought process
               | than get the right answer with shitty code that was
               | obviously memorized. It's much harder to teach people
               | _how_ to think than it is to teach them some specific
               | thing to remember.
               | 
               | [0] I've almost immediately regretted this decision...
               | 
               | [1] General frustration yelling, not yelling at you
               | 
               | [2] No, the "find duplicate contacts" option does not in
               | fact find duplicate contacts (what fucking data are they
               | looking for? Because it sure as hell isn't identical
               | names. Why isn't it even trying to do similar names?!)
               | 
               | [3] I've also missed so many fucking things because that
               | little scroll wheel wasn't completely finished with its
               | animation and so saved the wrong day or switched AM to
               | PM. I've missed so many things because I have so little
               | control over notifications and they disappear not if I
               | dismiss them, but if I just unlock my god damn phone. So
               | not just that one liner needs to be done, but it would do
               | a lot and these other one-liners would also greatly help.
               | 
               | [4] Dude was complaining about candidates using GPT to do
               | leetcode problems and how he had a hard time figuring out
               | if they were cheating or not. One of my many suggestions
               | was "why not do in person interviews?" which was answered
               | with how expensive plane tickets were (his interviewees
               | were local) and contradicted his prior and later
               | statements about how costly it is to hire/interview
               | someone. I'm sorry, what percentage of 6 engineer's
               | salaries to do 6 interviews for an hour is a single round
               | trip ticket for a domestic flight? Or to have someone...
               | drive in...
        
               | bonoboTP wrote:
               | Obviously they meant monetary value _for the software
               | company_. How much more revenue will they make if they
               | implement it?
        
               | indymike wrote:
               | Hmm. If the annual subscription is $100 then the value of
               | fixing this is $100.
               | 
               | If it is free, then, what's the profile worth for a
               | year... there's the value.
               | 
               | User retention is a thing.
        
               | godelski wrote:
               | I mean these numbers are just made up anyways, so why are
               | engineers concerned with them? The idea of _engineers_
               | needing to justify _monetary_ value is just... ill
               | conceived. They should be concerned with engineering
               | problems. Let the engineering manager worry about the
               | imaginary money numbers.                 > User retention
               | is a thing.
               | 
               | Problem is no one needs to care about the product's
               | quality if the product has the market cornered... Even
               | less of a concern if the users don't know how to pick
               | good products from bad products. Tech illiteracy directly
               | leads to Lemon Markets
        
               | TeMPOraL wrote:
               | > _I mean these numbers are just made up anyways, so why
               | are engineers concerned with them?_
               | 
               | That's what they're directly or indirectly being graded
               | on. Even if they don't have to show how their work
               | impacted the company's bottom line, their managers or
               | their managers' managers have to, and poop just rolls
               | downhill.
               | 
               | > _The idea of engineers needing to justify monetary
               | value is just... ill conceived. They should be concerned
               | with engineering problems. Let the engineering manager
               | worry about the imaginary money numbers._
               | 
               | If this was only possible in this industry. If you're in
               | a small company, you're wearing multiple hats anyway. If
               | you're in a big corp, well, my wife hates that I see this
               | in everything, but - hidden inflation is a thing. As
               | roles are eliminated (er, "streamlined"), everyone is
               | forced to be responsible for things they're not really
               | supposed to care about (my favorite example is filing
               | expense reports).
               | 
               | As you aptly put it upthread: we fucked up...
        
               | reflexco wrote:
               | User retention is not much of a thing anymore thanks to
               | the stickiness afforded by integrated services and
               | network effects.
               | 
               | You can't just switch calendar/video streaming when
               | everything else is integrated with it/everyone is
               | exclusively posting on this network.
        
               | yacthing wrote:
               | > We're both programmers so we're both know we're talking
               | about a one line regex...
               | 
               | As a big tech programmer, it's almost never that
               | simple...
               | 
               | Small edges cases not covered by a one line regex can
               | mean big issues at scale, especially when we're talking
               | about removing things from a calendar.
        
           | the_af wrote:
           | The auto-dub feature is madness. I noticed it first a couple
           | of days ago, I'm crossing my fingers that few authors choose
           | to enable it, and that YouTube makes it easy to disable as a
           | default in settings (not currently possible, you have to do
           | it as you watch, every time).
           | 
           | I'm in a Spanish speaking country, but I want to watch
           | English videos in English.
           | 
           | Auto-generated subtitles for other languages are ok, but I
           | want to listen to the original voices!
        
             | OJFord wrote:
             | I don't want it dubbed whether I speak the language or not.
        
               | the_af wrote:
               | Yes, this is what I mean. I NEVER want it dubbed.
               | 
               | I'd rather use auto-generated subtitles (even if flawed),
               | but I want to hear the original voices!
        
             | zahlman wrote:
             | > Auto-generated subtitles for other languages are ok, but
             | I want to listen to the original voices!
             | 
             | The first time I saw this feature, it was on a cover of
             | some pop song in a foreign language. Why on Earth... ?
        
             | LtdJorge wrote:
             | What about the auto translated titles? It also happens for
             | chapters in the video...
             | 
             | Sames languages as you. It drives me nuts because the
             | translations are almost always wrong.
        
               | Bootvis wrote:
               | This "feature" amazes me. It is badly done and a bad
               | idea. I haver never watched a dubbed video so why show me
               | a translated title? It's also surprising, Google has
               | plenty ESL employees on staff.
        
               | bonoboTP wrote:
               | There has to be some KPI tied to how often the AI model
               | is used in production for providing translations on
               | YouTube etc. Someone's promotion hangs on the translation
               | feature being used as often as possible on YouTube.
        
             | pjc50 wrote:
             | Comments are quite good at pointing out when the creator
             | has accidentally left it on (it is of course enabled by
             | default and authors have to actively disable it).
        
             | kevin_thibedeau wrote:
             | It is enabled by default. One creator of English language
             | content had their video misclassified as Spanish and people
             | were getting a machine English dub on an English video.
             | Support to fix it appears to be a nightmare.
        
               | the_af wrote:
               | Wait, do you mean it's enabled by default but the author
               | can disable it?
               | 
               | If not, I wonder why I can still watch most videos in
               | their original language (even though I'm in a Spanish-
               | speaking country), and I only encountered this once so
               | far.
        
               | kevin_thibedeau wrote:
               | There is supposed to be a procedure to manually remove
               | each language dub but it was broken (at least as of last
               | year).
        
           | rodrigodlu wrote:
           | Thanks for the recommendation.
           | 
           | I was using the browser feature that disables the mobile mode
           | on smartphones.
           | 
           | The autodub feature should be disabled asap. Or at least have
           | a way to disable globally on all my devices.
        
           | ekianjo wrote:
           | I wonder who got the idea at Youtube that forced auto-dub was
           | a good idea. This shows how dysfunctional the management is.
           | It's one thing to have assholes in your team, it's a
           | different thing to not look at what they are doing.
        
         | ac29 wrote:
         | > Awaiting their "premium cannot be shared with people outside
         | household" policy so I can finally cancel
         | 
         | That's been a policy for a while, the sign up page prominently
         | says "Plan members must be in the same household".
         | 
         | No idea if its enforced though.
        
           | phkahler wrote:
           | I have 2 homes. Every time I "go up north" I have to switch
           | my Netflix household and then back again when I return. This
           | sounds like that won't even be possible.
        
         | beala wrote:
         | I'm also a premium subscriber, and have struggled with the same
         | issues on the iPad app. I try to keep some shows downloaded for
         | my toddler, and the download feature never seems to work on the
         | first try.
         | 
         | I finally got so fed up, I bought a Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 off
         | ebay for $50 and flashed it with LineageOS. I can now load
         | whatever media I want onto the 1 TB sdcard I've installed in
         | it. The 5 year old hardware plays videos just fine with the VLC
         | app. And, as a bonus, I discovered that NewPipe, an alternative
         | YouTube client I installed through the F-Droid store, is
         | actually much more reliable at downloading videos than the
         | official client. I was planning on using yt-dlp to load up the
         | sdcard, but now I don't even need to do that.
        
           | moralestapia wrote:
           | Tangential.
           | 
           | The TIDAL app is absolute trash, it has this same issue all
           | the time; not just that, but also, if a download fails it
           | just hangs there and does not download the rest of the
           | album/playlist.
           | 
           | Also, why would you want to download things in the first
           | place? To watch them offline, right? Well, guess what happens
           | when you open the app w/o an internet connection ... it asks
           | you to login, so you cannot even access your music. 900k/year
           | TOC genius work there.
           | 
           | The only reason why I haven't canceled is because I'm too
           | lazy to reset my password in order to login and cancel, lol.
           | Might do it soon, though.
        
             | galaxy_gas wrote:
             | When I try it for a month, the worst part.. your entire
             | download queue fails forever unless you manually remove
             | hundreds of items one by one
             | 
             | There is no way to remove the stuck item if it's been pull
             | from streaming library or you in country that -- such
             | traveling etc -- does not have r ights to it. You simply
             | cannot open the track to undownload it
        
             | xienze wrote:
             | One thing I like about Tidal though: you can download
             | everything, DRM-free, using tidal-ng.
        
           | aeyes wrote:
           | I use yt-dlp inside of a-shell on iOS, then play files using
           | VLC.
        
             | comprev wrote:
             | Nice trick I'll have to try this. Thanks!
        
             | stirlo wrote:
             | Doesn't solve VLCs suckiness on iOS. No PiP support when
             | it's been in iOS for years now...
        
               | averageRoyalty wrote:
               | When your PR is ready, you can submit it here:
               | 
               | https://github.com/videolan/vlc-ios/pulls
        
             | fyrabanks wrote:
             | i use this for things i repost on IG with commentary. i
             | would rather not have a huge folder of downloads of random
             | stuff i'm not even sure i want to revisit. (and i'm bad
             | about clearing out space on my phone.)
        
           | bigyabai wrote:
           | NewPipe is incredible. If Google ever stops signing apps like
           | that, I'll be switching to a Linux phone.
        
             | cranberryturkey wrote:
             | as soon as they have a map app that works with car play i'm
             | switching to linux phone.
        
               | bigyabai wrote:
               | GNOME Maps is good enough for me. I don't know what
               | Carplay is and at this point I'd rather not ask.
        
               | m4tthumphrey wrote:
               | Framework for using your cars infotainment system as your
               | screen/input device. Android has something similar called
               | Android Auto.
        
               | jraph wrote:
               | Don't car play and android auto rely on proprietary
               | libraries? I doubt it will come to Linux phones unless
               | they take off or something like microg reimplements the
               | proprietary parts.
        
             | chasil wrote:
             | I use another app from F-Droid called Skytube for
             | occasional downloads. I like it.
             | 
             | https://f-droid.org/en/packages/free.rm.skytube.oss/
             | 
             | https://f-droid.org/en/packages/free.rm.skytube.legacy.oss/
        
         | maplethorpe wrote:
         | What video did you watch?
        
           | piyuv wrote:
           | Nintendo Direct. Download issue persisted with all videos
           | though
        
         | meindnoch wrote:
         | >Awaiting their "premium cannot be shared with people outside
         | household" policy so I can finally cancel.
         | 
         | Then I have good news for you!
         | https://lifehacker.com/tech/youtube-family-premium-crackdown
         | 
         | In fact, I've got an email from them about this already. My YT
         | is still ad-free though, so not sure when it's going to kick in
         | for real.
        
           | pixl97 wrote:
           | Ya I got this message when I was on vacation for a week.
           | Seems a little messy on their part.
        
         | yolo_420 wrote:
         | I am a premium subscriber so I can download via yt-dlp in peace
         | without any errors or warnings.
         | 
         | We are not the same.
        
         | gjsman-1000 wrote:
         | For anyone here who runs a startup, I propose two lifestyle
         | benefits you should add:
         | 
         | 1. Unlimited YouTube Premium
         | 
         | 2. Unlimited drink reimbursement (coffee, tea, smoothies,
         | whatever)
         | 
         | The psychological sense of loss from those two things would be
         | larger than any 5% raise.
        
           | whatshisface wrote:
           | I personally wouldn't want to hire a startup employee who
           | couldn't figure out how to install a browser extension. ;-)
        
             | gjsman-1000 wrote:
             | You're assuming startups are all tech. At my job, tech is
             | not even 1/3 of employees.
        
               | dotancohen wrote:
               | Browser extensions are not meant for the technical crowd,
               | they're meant to be installed by all users of the
               | browser. If someone is not bright enough to figure out
               | how to install a browser extension, or change a
               | lightbulb, or refill the ice tray, tech worker or not I
               | don't need them in my startup.
        
             | nharada wrote:
             | Roku tho
        
             | posterguy wrote:
             | ah yes, let me just install a browser extension on the kids
             | ipad
        
               | whatshisface wrote:
               | FYI for next time you're buying, you can install Firefox
               | on Android, although this is perhaps threatened by
               | Google's planned changes to user's ability to install
               | software.
        
               | godelski wrote:
               | Here, this will help with that
               | 
               | https://kagi.com/orion/
        
           | edoceo wrote:
           | I don't like that math, rather have the 5% than $8k in perks.
        
             | gjsman-1000 wrote:
             | The pitch is for the employer: This would likely be both
             | cheaper and simultaneously stickier.
        
         | hysan wrote:
         | I also have YouTube premium and watch mostly on my iPad and TV.
         | YouTube constantly logs me out at least once per day. I notice
         | because I'll randomly start seeing ads again (I open videos
         | from my rss reader, never their site). This never happened when
         | I wasn't on premium. I don't get what they're doing, but my
         | impression after almost a year is that it's only slightly less
         | annoying than getting ads. At this point, I might as well not
         | renew and just use ad block.
        
         | stronglikedan wrote:
         | > Awaiting their "premium cannot be shared with people outside
         | household" policy
         | 
         | I recently got paused for "watching on another device" when I
         | wasn't. I don't think that policy you mention is too far off.
        
         | observationist wrote:
         | ReVanced and other alternatives exist.
         | 
         | So long as they are broadcasting media to the public without an
         | explicit login system, so as to take advantage of public access
         | for exposure, it will remain perfectly legitimate and ethical
         | to access the content through whatever browser or software you
         | want.
         | 
         | After they blitzed me with ads and started arbitrarily changing
         | features and degrading the experience, I stopped paying them
         | and went for the free and adblocking clients and experience.
         | 
         | I may get rid of phones from my life entirely if they follow
         | through with blocking third party apps and locking things down.
        
           | mschuster91 wrote:
           | the problem is, you cannot be sure what Google does if they
           | catch you violating their ToS. They have killed off _entire
           | google accounts_ for YT copyright strikes with no recourse.
        
             | realusername wrote:
             | That's why I'm not using Google accounts for anything
             | important, I left gmail in 2014 and I really advise
             | everybody to do the same.
             | 
             | You never know when the hammer can drop.
        
               | bornfreddy wrote:
               | This. I simply don't understand why some people rely on
               | Google given the risk level, impact and their no-
               | recourse-except-maybe-public-shaming policy.
        
               | Akronymus wrote:
               | Yeah, same. I still have a gmail account that just
               | forwards emails, and I update the email on services as
               | they come on. Being on your own domain for email is just
               | better.Though, I use a service provider to handle the
               | mail server itself
        
               | fragmede wrote:
               | Google doesn't capriciously deprecate things in a short
               | amount of time. When they sunset features, there's plenty
               | of warning. They'll tell you that there's a hammer, that
               | it's going to drop on you in 6 months, which is plenty of
               | time for you to get out from under it. Which, I mean, I'd
               | rather there not be a hammer, but it's not like they're
               | gonna announce on a Friday that they're shutting down
               | Google Keep on Monday and I need to wreck my whole
               | weekend in order to save all my notes.
        
               | catgirlinspace wrote:
               | The hammer isn't shutting down a service, it refers to
               | your Google account getting banned for a violation or
               | whatever reason they feel like.
        
               | realusername wrote:
               | I'm not afraid of them deprecating Gmail, I'm afraid thar
               | I wake up one day and the account is banned without
               | recourse.
        
           | johnmaguire wrote:
           | > ReVanced and other alternatives exist.
           | 
           | For now. I suspect this is the real reason Google is going to
           | require a developer cert even for sideloaded apps:
           | https://www.techradar.com/phones/android/google-will-soon-
           | st...
        
         | paxys wrote:
         | I'm constantly baffled by how bad the implementation of YouTube
         | Premium downloads is. Videos will buffer to 100% in a matter of
         | seconds but get endlessly stuck when I hit the download button.
         | Why? All the bytes are literally on my device already.
        
           | jerf wrote:
           | The whole YouTube app is weird. Sometimes it lets you do
           | 1.0x-2.0x. Sometimes it lets you range from .25x-4x.
           | Sometimes it pops up a text selection box with every .05x
           | option from .1 to 4.0. Sometimes it has a nicer UI with
           | shortcut selections for common choices and a sliding bar for
           | speed. It recently picked up a bug where if you're listening
           | to a downloaded video, but turn the screen off and on again,
           | the video playback seems to crash. A few months ago it became
           | very, very slow at casting, all manipulations could take 30
           | seconds to propagate to the cast video (pause, changing
           | videos, etc)... but they didn't usually get lost. (It would
           | be less weird if they did just get lost sometimes.) You
           | aggressively can't cast a short to a TV, in a way that
           | clearly shows this is policy for some incomprehensible
           | reason, but if you use the YouTube app directly on your set
           | top box it'll happily play a short on your TV. Despite its
           | claims in small text that downloads are good for a month
           | without being rechecked, periodically it just loses track of
           | all the downloads and has to redownload them. It also is
           | clearly trying to reauthorize downloads I made just 30
           | minutes ago sometimes when I'm in a no-Internet zone,
           | defeating the entire purpose. When downloads are about 1/4th
           | done it displays the text "ready to watch on the download
           | screen" but if you try to watch it it'll fail with "not yet
           | fully downloaded".
           | 
           | Feels like the app has passed the complexity threshold of
           | what the team responsible for it can handle. Or possibly, too
           | much AI code and not enough review and testing. And those
           | don't have to be exclusive possibilities.
        
             | knome wrote:
             | the control changes sound like you might have gotten caught
             | in some kind of a-b testing
        
               | jerf wrote:
               | They flop back and forth at a high frequency though. I
               | can hit all three cases in five minutes and it's been
               | like that for months.
               | 
               | Also there is never a sensible reason to offer video
               | speeds as a combo-box popup of all options from .05x to
               | 4.00x. It's like three times the vertical size of my
               | screen.
        
               | Barbing wrote:
               | All that testing and they've never thought to offer a
               | one-tap way to get back into speed control once I've
               | adjusted the speed one or more times on the same video.
               | 
               | Don't get me started on the "highest quality" account
               | setting absolutely never selecting 4K options when
               | available. They simply have to try to save the bandwidth
               | money by nesting quality options a couple taps away. (A
               | userscript fixes this on desktop and even in Safari
               | iOS/iPadOS, but I don't deserve the quality I'm paying
               | for if I use their native app.) [Privileged rant over!]
        
               | TeMPOraL wrote:
               | This is becoming a common pattern everywhere now.
               | 
               | Case in point (and sorry for bringing up _this_ topic),
               | LLM providers seem to be doubling down on automatic model
               | selection, and marketing it as a feature that improves
               | experience and response quality for the users, even
               | though it 's a blatant attempt to cut serving costs down
               | by tricking users (or taking the choice away) into
               | querying a cheaper, weaker model. It's obviously not what
               | users want - in this space, even more than in video
               | streaming, in 90%+ of end-user cases, what the user wants
               | is the best SOTA model available.
               | 
               | At least with YouTube, I recall them being up front about
               | this in the past, early in the COVID-19 pandemic - IIRC
               | the app itself explained in the UI that the default
               | quality is being lowered to conserve bandwidth that
               | suddenly got much more scarce.
        
           | lukan wrote:
           | Because they want to control the bytes on your devices.
           | 
           | Giving you the bytes would be easy, the hard part is
           | preventing the free flow of information. And those bugs are
           | the side effects.
        
         | N0isRESFe8GXmqR wrote:
         | I run into that download issue all the time. I need to pause
         | downloading each video. Force close the youtube app. Then
         | unpause the downloads to get them downloading again. It has
         | been happening for years and is still unfixed.
        
         | dostick wrote:
         | YouTube's "Download" is not really a download, it's actually
         | "cache offline" within YouTube app.
        
         | some-guy wrote:
         | Also a paying YT Premium subscriber. I live in a rural part of
         | CA where there isn't much 5G reception. For extremely long
         | drives in my minivan, I allow my toddler to watch Ms. Rachel on
         | the screen via an HDMI port input from my iPhone. Youtube
         | Premium videos have DRM that disallow downloads to play over
         | HDMI, so I had to do what you did and add them as files locally
         | to VLC and play them from there.
        
         | fragmede wrote:
         | I'll admit to using yt-dlp to get copies of videos I wish to
         | have a local copy of, which can't be taken away from me by
         | somebody else, but I pay for premium because that pays for
         | content I watch. If you don't pay for content, where's it going
         | to come from? Patreon only works for super dedicated stars with
         | a huge following.
        
         | icelancer wrote:
         | YouTube premium "download" is also just completely fake.
         | Downloaded where? What file can I copy?
        
           | TeMPOraL wrote:
           | Files? What era do you hail from? Prehistory?
           | 
           | There are no files anymore. I mean, there technically are,
           | but copyright industry doesn't want you to look at them
           | without authorization, security people don't want you to look
           | at them _at all_ , and UX experts think it's a bad idea for
           | you to even know such thing as "files" exists.
           | 
           | Share and enjoy. Like and subscribe. The world is just apps
           | all the way down.
        
         | loganlinn wrote:
         | I had a similar experience on YouTube Music. I discovered the
         | message was misleading and I just had to enable downloads when
         | not on WiFi
        
       | arbll wrote:
       | I wonder if we're going to see JS runtime fingerprinting attempt
       | from google now
        
         | jeroenhd wrote:
         | I doubt it'd be difficult for Google to detect if the client is
         | a browser or not. They already need to check for signals of
         | abnormal use to detect things like clickfarms and ad scams.
        
           | cxr wrote:
           | > detect if the client is a browser
           | 
           | User agents are like journalists: there's no such thing as
           | pretending to be one.
           | 
           | If someone writes their own client and says, "This is a
           | browser", then it is one.
        
         | rs186 wrote:
         | Ah, JavaScript Run-time Integrity checks!
        
         | dishsoap wrote:
         | Have they not done this for years and years already?
        
       | tomalaci wrote:
       | Looks like this runtime is written in Rust. Really does seem like
       | Rust is rapidly swallowing all kinds of common tools and
       | libraries. In this case a single compiled binary for multiple
       | architectures is quite convenient for something like yt-dlp.
        
         | jeroenhd wrote:
         | Deno itself is written mostly in Rust, but it also leverages
         | [1] Google's V8 Javascript engine which is written in C++.
         | 
         | [1]: https://choubey.gitbook.io/internals-of-
         | deno/architecture/v8
        
       | est wrote:
       | I really appreciate the engineering effort went into this
       | "JavaScript interpreter"
       | 
       | https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/blob/2025.09.23/yt_dlp/jsin...
        
         | stevage wrote:
         | heh, that's pretty cool.
        
         | supriyo-biswas wrote:
         | Heh, now I wonder how much JavaScript it actually interprets
         | and given that it's < 1000 lines, whether it could be used
         | towards an introductory course in compilers.
        
           | kccqzy wrote:
           | Obviously not. An introductory course would introduce
           | concepts like lexers, parsers, AST, etc, instead of working
           | on strings.
           | 
           | Here are lines 431 through 433:                   if
           | expr.startswith('new '):             obj = expr[4:]
           | if obj.startswith('Date('):
        
           | Too wrote:
           | There's a famous presentation by David Beazley where he
           | implements a WASM interpreter in Python in under an hour.
           | Highly recommended.
        
             | bangaladore wrote:
             | Bytecode interpreters are quite simple compared to the
             | actual lexer / parser.
        
         | LordShredda wrote:
         | I'm on mobile, this seems like an actual js interpreter that
         | only does objects and arithmetic. Impressive that it went that
         | far
        
         | jollyllama wrote:
         | I wonder how long until it gets split off into its own project.
         | For the time being, it could do with a lot more documentation.
         | At least they've got some tests for it!
        
           | CaptainOfCoit wrote:
           | > I wonder how long until it gets split off into its own
           | project
           | 
           | The submission is literally about them moving away from it in
           | favor of Deno, so I think "never" probably gets pretty close.
        
             | jollyllama wrote:
             | Thanks for explaining - I didn't understand that this is
             | what was being replaced.
        
           | zahlman wrote:
           | Aside from the fact that the point of the announcement is
           | that they're dropping it entirely, this "interpreter" is a
           | hack that definitely is nowhere near capable of interpreting
           | arbitrary JS. For example, the only use of `new` it handles
           | is for Date objects, which it does by balancing parens to
           | deduce the arguments for the call, then treating the entire
           | group of arguments as a string and applying regexes to that.
        
         | sirbranedamuj wrote:
         | This is the buried lede in this announcement for me - I had no
         | idea they were already going to such lengths. It's really
         | impressive!
        
         | codedokode wrote:
         | I decided just to look at the code for a moment and discovered
         | ChainMap in Python.
        
           | ddtaylor wrote:
           | This is excellent for some of my usages. I want to have my AI
           | agents "fork" their context in some ways, this could be
           | useful for that instead of juggling a tree of dictionaries.
        
         | XnoiVeX wrote:
         | It's a subset of Javascript. HN discussion here
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32794081
        
           | ASalazarMX wrote:
           | This is amazing, an old school but effective approach in this
           | modern age. I was afraid they were going to embed a browser.
        
         | Aurornis wrote:
         | This is perfect for the problem they were solving. Really cool
         | that they took it this far to avoid adding further overhead.
        
         | jokoon wrote:
         | Wait I thought they were running an entire browser engine
        
           | ddtaylor wrote:
           | Over time they probably will require that. I believe YT still
           | allows most of these things because of "legacy" apps, which
           | they have been killing off bit by bit. I'm not sure if anyone
           | is cataloging the oldest supported app, but most things like
           | using YT from a slightly older game console don't work
           | anymore.
           | 
           | Basically any publicly known method that can sip video
           | content with doing the least work and authentication will be
           | a common point of attack for this.
        
       | m_ke wrote:
       | I used to work on video generation models and was shocked at how
       | hard it was to find any videos online that were not hosted on
       | YouTube, and YouTube has made it impossibly hard to download more
       | than a few videos at a time.
        
         | fibers wrote:
         | you have to feed it multiple arguments with rate limiting and
         | long wait times. i am not sure if there have been recent
         | updates other than the js interpreter but ive had to spin up a
         | docker instance of a browser to feed it session cookies as
         | well.
        
           | m_ke wrote:
           | Yeah we had to roll through a bunch of proxy servers on top
           | of all the other tricks you mentioned to reliably download at
           | a decent pace
        
             | trenchpilgrim wrote:
             | What are your thoughts on the load scrapers are putting on
             | website operators?
        
         | raincole wrote:
         | > YouTube has made it impossibly hard to download more than a
         | few videos at a time
         | 
         | I wonder why. Perhaps because people use bots to mass-crawl
         | contents from youtube to train their AI. And Youtube
         | prioritizes normal users who only watch a few videos at most at
         | the same time, over those crawling bots.
         | 
         | Who knows?
        
           | m_ke wrote:
           | I wonder how Google built their empire. Who knows? I'm sure
           | they didn't scrape every page and piece of media on the
           | internet and train models on it.
           | 
           | My point was that the large players have monopoly hold on
           | large swaths of the internet and are using it to further
           | advantage themselves over the competition. See Veo 3 as an
           | example, YouTube creators didn't upload their work to help
           | Google train a model to compete with them but Google did it
           | anyways, and creators didn't have a choice because all eye
           | balls are on YouTube.
        
             | raincole wrote:
             | > how Google built their empire. Who knows
             | 
             | By scraping every page _and directing the traffic back to
             | the site owners._ That was how Google built their empire.
             | 
             | Are they abusing the empire's power now? In multiple ways,
             | such as the AI overview stuff. But don't pretend that
             | crawling Youtube and training video generation models is
             | the same as what Google (once) brought to the internet. And
             | it's ridiculous to expect Youtube to make it easy for
             | crawlers.
        
       | Andrews54757 wrote:
       | Nsig/sig - Special tokens which must be passed to API calls,
       | generated by code in base.js (player code). This is what has
       | broken for yt-dlp and other third party clients. Instead of
       | extracting the code that generates those tokens (eg using regular
       | expressions) like we used to, we now need to run the whole
       | base.js player code to get these tokens because the code is
       | spread out all over the player code.
       | 
       | PoToken - Proof of origin token which Google has lately been
       | enforcing for all clients, or video requests will fail with a
       | 403. On android it uses DroidGuard, for IOS, it uses built in app
       | integrity apis. For the web it requires that you run a snippet of
       | javascript code (the challenge) in the browser to prove that you
       | are not a bot. Previously, you needed an external tool to
       | generate these PoTokens but with the Deno change yt-dlp should be
       | capable of producing these tokens by itself in the near future.
       | 
       | SABR - Server side adaptive bitrate streaming, used alongside
       | Google's UMP protocol to allow the server to have more control
       | over buffering, given data from the client about the current
       | playback position, buffered ranges, and more. This technology is
       | also used to do server-side ad injection. Work is still being
       | done to make 3rd party clients work with this technology
       | (sometimes works, sometimes doesn't).
       | 
       | Nsig/sig extraction example:
       | 
       | - https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/blob/4429fd0450a3fbd5e89573...
       | 
       | - https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/blob/4429fd0450a3fbd5e89573...
       | 
       | PoToken generation:
       | 
       | - https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/wiki/PO-Token-Guide
       | 
       | - https://github.com/LuanRT/BgUtils
       | 
       | SABR:
       | 
       | - https://github.com/LuanRT/googlevideo
       | 
       | EDIT2: Addeded more links to specific code examples/guides
        
         | ACCount37 wrote:
         | If you ever wondered why the likes of Google and Cloudflare
         | want to restrict the web to a few signed, integrity-checked
         | browser implementations?
         | 
         | Now you know.
        
           | codedokode wrote:
           | There could be valid reasons for fighting downloaders, for
           | example:
           | 
           | - AI companies scraping YT without paying YT let alone
           | creators for training data. Imagine how many data YT has.
           | 
           | - YT competitors in other countries scraping YT to copy
           | videos, especially in countries where YT is blocked. Some
           | such companies have a function "move all my videos from YT"
           | to promote bloggers migration.
        
             | toomuchtodo wrote:
             | - Enforce views of ads
             | 
             | (not debating the validity of this reason, but this is the
             | entire reason Youtube exists, to sell and push ads)
        
             | baxuz wrote:
             | Then they should allow a download API for paying customers.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | It's not YT's content though.
        
               | codedokode wrote:
               | Music labels publish the music on YT in exchange for ad
               | revenue, they won't be happy if someone would download
               | their music for free, and making music is expensive,
               | google how much just a single drum mic costs and you need
               | lot of them.
        
               | baxuz wrote:
               | > for paying customers
        
               | codedokode wrote:
               | YT shares income from subscriptions with music labels? I
               | didn't hear about this, and even if they shared the
               | download must be paid much higher than a view because
               | after downloading a person could potentially listen for a
               | track hundred times in a row.
        
               | diet_mtn_dew wrote:
               | Youtube premium includes Youtube Music, which is
               | alphabet's streaming service, and I assume that they are
               | paying the same fees as everyone else.
        
               | codedokode wrote:
               | > as everyone else
               | 
               | "Everyone else" do not allow to download music in an
               | unencrypted format, so it makes sense if YT doesn't allow
               | also.
        
               | balder1991 wrote:
               | But even if you're a paying customer, the creator is only
               | paid if you watch it on the platform.
        
             | transcriptase wrote:
             | >AI companies
             | 
             | Like Google?
             | 
             | >scraping YT without paying YT let alone creators for
             | training data
             | 
             | Like Google has been doing to the entire internet,
             | including people's movement, conversations, and habits...
             | for decades?
        
               | codedokode wrote:
               | > Like Google?
               | 
               | Like Google competitors obviously.
               | 
               | > Like Google has been doing to the entire internet,
               | including people's movement, conversations, and habits...
               | for decades?
               | 
               | Yes, but if you allowed to index your site (companies
               | even spent money to make site better indexable), Google
               | used to bring customers and AI companies bring back
               | nothing. They are just freeloaders.
        
             | Chris2048 wrote:
             | Who says these are valid?
        
             | supriyo-biswas wrote:
             | Why is this being downvoted? Are people really gonna shoot
             | the messenger and fail to why a company may be willing to
             | protect their competitive position?
        
           | supriyo-biswas wrote:
           | At least for YouTube, viewbotting is very much a thing, which
           | undermines trust in the platform. Even if we were to remove
           | Google ads from the equation, there's nothing preventing
           | someone from crafting a channel with millions of bot-
           | generated views and comments, in order to paid sponsor
           | placements, etc.
           | 
           | The reasons are similar for Cloudflare, but their stances are
           | a bit too DRMish for my tastes. I guess someone could draw
           | the lines differently.
        
             | rwmj wrote:
             | I'm sure that's a problem for Youtube. What does it have to
             | do with me rendering Youtube videos on my own computer in
             | the way I want?
        
               | pwg wrote:
               | > What does it have to do with me rendering Youtube
               | videos on my own computer in the way I want?
               | 
               | It doesn't. That interferes with google's ad revenue
               | stream, which is why YT continues to try to make it
               | harder and harder to do so.
        
               | bitwize wrote:
               | You don't have that right. When you view copyrighted
               | content, you do so at the pleasure of the licensor.
        
               | rwmj wrote:
               | How you watch copyrighted content has never been
               | something that copyright has controlled.
        
             | ForHackernews wrote:
             | > which undermines trust in the platform
             | 
             | What? What does this even mean? Who "trusts" youtube? It's
             | filled with disinformation, AI slop and nonsense.
        
               | supriyo-biswas wrote:
               | I provided an example is given right after that sentence.
               | Trustworthiness of the content is an entirely separate
               | thing.
        
               | attila-lendvai wrote:
               | you forgot the excessive censorship, of course to "fight
               | disinformation"...
               | 
               | it even became an interesting signal which
               | "disinformation" they deem censorship-worthy.
        
             | ACCount37 wrote:
             | If any of this was done to combat viewbotting, then any
             | disruption to token calculation would prevent views from
             | being registered - not videos from being downloaded.
        
               | supriyo-biswas wrote:
               | From my perspective both problems are effectively the
               | same. I want to count unique users by checking for asset
               | downloads and correlating unique session IDs. People can
               | request the static assets directly, leading to view
               | booting and waste of egress bandwidth.
               | 
               | The solution: have clients prove they are a legitimate
               | client by running some computationally intensive JS that
               | interacts with DOM APIs, etc. (which is not in any way
               | unique to big tech, see Anubis/CreepJS etc.)
               | 
               | The impact on the hobbyist use case is, to them, just
               | collateral damage.
        
               | ACCount37 wrote:
               | No, the difference is: if I'm fighting viewbots, I want
               | zero cues to be emitted to the client. The client should
               | NEVER know whether its view is being counted or not, or
               | why.
               | 
               | Having no reliable feedback makes it so much harder for a
               | viewbotter to find a workaround.
               | 
               | If there's a visible block on video downloads? They're
               | not fighting viewbots with that.
        
               | supriyo-biswas wrote:
               | For general spam deterrence I agree, but how do you
               | prevent paying for the bandwidth in this case?
        
             | sporkxrocket wrote:
             | As a viewer, this is not even remotely my problem.
        
             | wzdd wrote:
             | Youtube has already accounted for this by using a separate
             | endpoint to count watch stats. See the recent articles
             | about view counts being down attributed to people using
             | adblockers.
             | 
             | Even if they hadn't done that, you can craft millions of
             | bot-sponsored views using a legitimate browser and some
             | automation and the current update doesn't change that.
             | 
             | So I'd say Occam's razor applies and Youtube simply wants
             | to be in control of how people view their videos so they
             | can serve ads, show additional content nearby to keep them
             | on the platform longer, track what parts of the video are
             | most watched, and so on.
        
             | imiric wrote:
             | Like another comment mentioned: that's a problem for
             | YouTube to solve.
             | 
             | They pay a lot of money to many smart people who can
             | implement sophisticated bot detection systems, without
             | impacting most legitimate human users. But when their
             | business model depends on extracting value from their
             | users' data, tracking their behavior and profiling them
             | across their services so that they can better serve them
             | ads, it goes against their bottom line for anyone to access
             | their service via any other interface than their official
             | ones.
             | 
             | This is what these changes are primarily about. Preventing
             | abuse is just a side benefit they can use as an excuse.
        
           | jasode wrote:
           | _> If you ever wondered why the likes of Google and
           | Cloudflare want to restrict the web _
           | 
           | I disagree with the framing of "us vs them".
           | 
           | It's actually "us vs us". It's not just us plebians vs FAANG
           | giants. The small-time independent publishers and creators
           | also want to restrict the web because they don't want their
           | content "stolen". They want to interact with real humans
           | instead of bots. The following are manifestations of the same
           | fear:
           | 
           | - small-time websites adding Anubis proof-of-work
           | 
           | - owners of popular Discord channels turning on the setting
           | for phone # verification as a requirement for joining
           | 
           | - web blogs wanting to put a "toll gate" (maybe utilize
           | Cloudflare or other service) to somehow make OpenAI and
           | others pay for the content
           | 
           | We're long past the days of colleagues and peers of ARPANET
           | and NFSNET sharing info for free on university computers. Now
           | everybody on the globe wants to try to make a dollar, and
           | likewise, they feel dollars are being stolen from them.
        
             | johnebgd wrote:
             | It's like we are living in an affordability crisis and
             | people are tired of 400 wealthy billionaires profiting from
             | peoples largess in the form of free data/tooling.
        
             | skydhash wrote:
             | > _small-time websites adding Anubis proof-of-work_
             | 
             | Those were already public. The issue is AI bot ddos-ing the
             | server. Not everyone has infinite bandwith.
             | 
             | > _owners of popular Discord channels turning on the
             | setting for phone # verification as a requirement for
             | joining_
             | 
             | I still think that Discord is a weird channel for community
             | stuff. There's a lot of different format for communication,
             | but people are defaulting to chat.
             | 
             | > _web blogs wanting to put a "toll gate" (maybe utilize
             | Cloudflare or other service) to somehow make OpenAI and
             | others pay for the content_
             | 
             | Paid contents are good (Coursera, O'Reilly, Udemy,...). But
             | a lot of these services wants to have free powered by ads
             | (for audience?).
             | 
             | ---
             | 
             | The fact is, we have two main bad actors: AI companies
             | hammering servers and companies that want to centralize
             | content (that they do not create) by adding gatekeeping
             | extension to standard protocols.
        
             | jrochkind1 wrote:
             | i _want_ my content borrowed /shared, and I still need to
             | be engaged in this stuff because the poorly behaved
             | distributed bots that have arisen in the past year are
             | trying to take boundless resources from my site(s), that I
             | cannot afford.
        
             | bayindirh wrote:
             | > Now everybody on the globe wants to try to make a dollar,
             | and likewise, they feel dollars are being stolen from them.
             | 
             | I'm not in it for the dollar. I just want the licenses I
             | put on my content/code to be respected, that's all. IOW, I
             | don't what I put out there to be free forever (as in speech
             | and beer) to be twisted and monetized by the people who re
             | in this for the dollar.
        
             | greenavocado wrote:
             | When Nixon slammed the gold window shut so Congress could
             | keep writing blank checks for Vietnam and the Great
             | Society, it wasn't just some monetary technicality. It was
             | the moment America broke its word to the world and broke
             | something fundamental in us too. Suddenly money wasn't
             | something you earned through sweat or innovation anymore.
             | It became something politicians and bankers could conjure
             | from thin air whenever they wanted another war, another
             | corporate bailout, another vote-buying scheme.
             | 
             | Fast forward fifty years and smell the rot. That same
             | fiscal recklessness Congress spending like drunken sailors
             | while pretending deficits don't matter has bled into every
             | pore of society. Why wouldn't it? When BlackRock scoops up
             | entire neighborhoods with Fed-printed cash while your kid
             | can't afford a studio apartment, people notice. When Tyson
             | jacks up chicken prices to record profits while diners
             | can't afford bacon, people feel it. And when some indie
             | blogger slaps a paywall on their life's work because OpenAI
             | vacuumed their words to train ChatGPT? That's the same
             | disease wearing digital clothes.
             | 
             | We're all living in Nixon's hangover. The "us vs us" chaos
             | you see Discord servers demanding your phone number, small
             | sites gatekeeping against bots, everyone scrambling to
             | monetize scraps that's what happens when trust evaporates.
             | Just like the dollar became Monopoly money after '71,
             | everything feels devalued now. Your labor? Worth less each
             | year. Your creativity? Someone's AI training fuel. Your
             | neighborhood? A BlackRock asset on a spreadsheet.
             | 
             | And Washington's still at it! Printing trillions to "save
             | the economy" while inflation eats your paycheck alive.
             | Passing trillion-dollar "infrastructure bills" that somehow
             | leave bridges crumbling but defense contractors swimming in
             | cash. It's the same old shell game: socialize the losses,
             | privatize the gains. The factory worker paying $8 for eggs
             | understands this. The nurse getting lectured about "wage
             | spirals" while hospital CEOs pocket millions understands
             | this. The teenager locking down their Discord because bots
             | keep spamming scams? They understand this.
             | 
             | Weimar happened when money became meaningless. 1971
             | happened when promises became meaningless. What you're
             | seeing now the suspicion, the barriers, the every-man-for-
             | himself hustle is what bubbles up when people realize the
             | whole system's running on fumes. The diner owner charging
             | $18 for a burger isn't greedy. The blogger blocking AI
             | scrapers isn't a Luddite. They're just building levees
             | against a flood Washington started with a printing press
             | half a century ago.
             | 
             | The tragedy is that we're all knee-deep in the same muddy
             | water, throwing sandbags at each other while the real
             | architects of this mess the political grifters, the Fed
             | bankers, the extraction-engine capitalists watch dry-eyed
             | from their high ground. Until we stop accepting their
             | counterfeit money and their counterfeit promises, we'll
             | keep drowning in this rigged game. The gold window didn't
             | just close in '71. The whole damn social contract rusted
             | shut.
        
               | chrisweekly wrote:
               | Wow. That was eloquent, and coherent, and depressing. I'd
               | be grateful for someone to counter with something less
               | dismal. Good things are still happening in the world. A
               | positive future remains possible -- but we have to be
               | able to imagine it to bring it into being.
        
               | sillyfluke wrote:
               | Well on the bright side blood avocados are still green.
               | Which the poster also seems to appreciate.
        
               | greenavocado wrote:
               | Lately I've had to resort to buying avocados from Costco
               | in those little plastic cups because whole avocados in
               | many supermarkets in my region have started to spoil too
               | quickly. Sad.
        
               | attila-lendvai wrote:
               | until people learn money, the concept, nothing will
               | change. and that in turn will hardly happen while the bad
               | guys own childhood (compulsory schooling).
        
               | zahlman wrote:
               | What does any of this have to do with yt-dlp?
        
               | dotancohen wrote:
               | Ostensibly the same forces that drove Nixon to move the
               | dollar off of gold, are driving Google to destroy third
               | party YouTube clients.
        
             | btown wrote:
             | But this, too, skips over some nuance. There are a few
             | types of actors here:
             | 
             | - small content creators who want to make their content
             | accessible to individuals
             | 
             | - companies that want to gobble up public data and resell
             | it in a way that destroys revenue streams for content
             | creators
             | 
             | - gatekeepers like Cloudflare who want to ostensibly stop
             | this but will also become rent-extractors in the process
             | 
             | - users who should have the right to use personal tools
             | like yt-dlp to customize their viewing experience, and do
             | _not_ wish to profit at the expense of the creators
             | 
             | We should be cautious _both_ that the gatekeepers stand to
             | profit from their gatekeeping, _and_ that their work
             | inhibits users as well.
             | 
             | If creators feel this type of user (often a dedicated fan
             | and would-be promoter) is a necessary sacrifice to defend
             | against predatory data extractors... then that's absolutely
             | the creator's choice, but you can't say there's a unified
             | "us" here.
        
             | bitwize wrote:
             | Duh. I've known this for decades. The biggest advocates for
             | DRM I've known are small-time content creators: authors,
             | video producers, musicians. They've been saying the same
             | thing since the 90s: without things like DRM, their stuff
             | would be pirated, and they'd like to earn a living doing
             | what they love instead of grinding at a day job to support
             | themselves while everybody benefits from their creative
             | output. In addition, major publishers and record labels
             | won't touch stuff that's been online because of the piracy
             | risk. They don't want to make an investment in smaller
             | creators without a return in the form of sales of copies.
             | That last bit is less true of music now than it used to be
             | because of streaming and stuff, but the principle still
             | applies.
             | 
             | This is why the DMCA will never be repealed, DRM will never
             | go away, and there is no future for general purpose
             | computing. People want access digital content, but the
             | creators of that content wouldn't release it at all if they
             | knew that it could be copied endlessly by whomever receives
             | it.
        
             | mschuster91 wrote:
             | > The small-time independent publishers and creators also
             | want to restrict the web because they don't want their
             | content "stolen"
             | 
             | ... or just keep their site on the Internet. There hasn't
             | been any major progress on sanctioning bad actors - be it
             | people running vulnerable IoT crap that ends up being taken
             | over by a botnet, cybercriminals and bulletproof hosters,
             | or nation state actors. As long as you don't attack targets
             | from your own geopolitical class (i.e. Russians don't
             | attack Russians, a lot of malware will just quit if it
             | spots Russian locale), you can do whatever the fuck you
             | want.
             | 
             | And that is how we end up with darknet services where you
             | can trivially order a DDoS taking down a website you don't
             | like or, if you manage to get your opponent's IP leaked
             | during an online game, their residential IP address. Pay
             | with whatever shitcoin you have, and no one is any wiser
             | who the perpetrator is.
        
             | pryelluw wrote:
             | I don't feel like dollars are stolen from me. It's more of
             | companies abusing my goodwill to publish information
             | online. From higher bills as a result of aggressive
             | crawling, to copying my work and removing all
             | copyright/licensing from the code. Sure, fair use and all,
             | but when they return the same exact code it just makes me
             | wonder.
             | 
             | Nowadays, producing anything feels like being the cows
             | udder.
        
             | mrguyorama wrote:
             | >The small-time independent publishers and creators also
             | want to restrict the web
             | 
             | Oh really? Does Linus's Floatplane go to this extent to
             | prevent users from downloading stuff? Does Nebula? Does
             | whatever that gun youtuber's version of video site do this?
             | 
             | Does Patreon?
        
             | einpoklum wrote:
             | > The small-time independent publishers and creators also
             | want to restrict the web because they don't want their
             | content "stolen".
             | 
             | I'm sure some music creators may have, years ago, been
             | against CD recorders, or platforms like Napster or even
             | IRC-based file transfer for sharing music. Hell, maybe they
             | were even against VCRs back in the day. But they were
             | misguided at best.
             | 
             | People who want to prevent computer users from freely
             | copying data are, in this context at least, part of "them"
             | rather than "us".
        
           | mtrovo wrote:
           | I don't know, it's really hard to blame them. In a way, the
           | next couple of years are going to be a battle to balance easy
           | access to info with compensation for content creators.
           | 
           | The web as we knew it before ChatGPT was built around the
           | idea that humans have to scavenge for information, and while
           | they're doing that, you can show them ads. In that world,
           | content didn't need to be too protected because you were
           | making up for it in eyeballs anyway.
           | 
           | With AI, that model is breaking down. We're seeing a shift
           | towards bot traffic rather than human traffic, and
           | information can be accessed far more effectively and, most
           | importantly, without ad impressions. So, it makes total sense
           | for them to be more protective about who has access to their
           | content and to make sure people are actually paying for it,
           | be it with ad views or some other form of agreement.
        
             | SV_BubbleTime wrote:
             | Don't worry!
             | 
             | Ads are coming to AI. The big AI push next will be context,
             | your context all the time. Your phone will "help" and get
             | all your data to OpenAI...
             | 
             | "It looks like you went for a run today? Good job, you
             | deserve a treat! Studies show a little ice cream after a
             | long run is effectively free calories! It just so happens
             | the nearest Dairy Queen is running a promotion just for the
             | next 30 minutes. I'm getting you directions now."
        
               | bitwize wrote:
               | This is why contra Louis Rossman, Clippy was not a good
               | thing for humanity.
        
               | codedokode wrote:
               | It would not be that much of a problem if ads promoted
               | healthy and tasty food but they will probably promote an
               | ice-cream made from a powder and chemicals emulating
               | taste of berries rather than from milk and fresh-picked
               | berries.
        
               | therein wrote:
               | It still would be. Loss of agency. Ads are text and
               | images you see. Native advertising in a chatbot
               | conversation is a third party bidding their way into your
               | conversation. Machine showing you an ad versus injecting
               | intention into your context are very different things.
        
               | Noumenon72 wrote:
               | "I'm calling the user analysis tool... it seems this user
               | is health conscious. I'll suggest a trail app for their
               | next run instead of ice cream."
        
               | nebula8804 wrote:
               | If open source AI becomes good enough would this model
               | hold? I guess they will try to shut down the open models
               | as they come close?
        
             | chrisweekly wrote:
             | I think your point is valid, but FTR the "shift" happened
             | long before ChatGPT; bot traffic has exceeded that of
             | humans for over a decade.
        
           | gjsman-1000 wrote:
           | Everything trends towards centralization on a long enough
           | period.
           | 
           | I laugh at people who think ActivityPub or Mastodon or
           | BlueSky will save us. _We already had that, it was called
           | e-mail, look what happened once everyone started using it._
           | 
           | If we couldn't stop the centralization effects that occurred
           | on e-mail, any attempt to stop centralization in general is
           | honestly a utopian fool's errand. Regulation is easier.
        
             | numpad0 wrote:
             | e-mail can't handle 24/7 1k posts/sec traffic which Twitter
             | was about. A more appropriate analogue is IRC.
        
             | toomuchtodo wrote:
             | I am a big supporter of AT Protocol, and I contribute some
             | money to a fund to build on it. Why laugh at running
             | experiments? Nothing will "save us," it is a constant
             | effort as long as humans desire to use these systems to
             | connect. Email exists today, and is very usable still as a
             | platform that cannot be captured. The consolidation
             | occurred because people do not want to run their own
             | servers, so we should build for that! Bluesky and AT
             | Protocol are experiments in building something different,
             | with different use cases and capabilities, that also cannot
             | be captured. Just like email. You can run your own PDS. You
             | can run your own stack from PDS to users "end to end" if
             | you so choose. You can pay to do both of these tasks. No
             | one can buy this or take it away from you, if it is built
             | on protocols instead of a platform someone can own and
             | control.
             | 
             | Regulation would be great. The EU does it well. It is
             | lacking in the US, and will be for some time. And so we
             | have to downgrade to technical mitigations against
             | centralization until regulation can meet the burden.
        
           | th0ma5 wrote:
           | Weird people talking about small time creators wanting DRM
           | I've never seen that... Usually they'd be hounding for any
           | attention? I don't know why multiple accounts are seemingly
           | independently bringing this up, but maybe it is trying to
           | muddy the waters? This concept?
        
           | eek2121 wrote:
           | The fact you shoved Cloudflare in there shows your ignorance
           | of the actual problems and solutions offered.
        
         | dylan604 wrote:
         | > For the web it requires that you run a snippet of javascript
         | code (the challenge) in the browser to prove that you are not a
         | bot.
         | 
         | How does this prove you are not a bot. How does this code not
         | work in a headless Chromimum if it's just client side JS?
        
           | Andrews54757 wrote:
           | Good question! Indeed you can run the challenge code using
           | headless Chromium and it will function [1]. They are
           | constantly updating the challenge however, and may add
           | additional checks in the future. I suppose Google wants to
           | make it more expensive overall to scrape Youtube to deter the
           | most egregious bots.
           | 
           | [1] https://github.com/LuanRT/BgUtils
        
             | toomuchtodo wrote:
             | LLMs solve challenges. Can we not solve these challenges
             | with sufficiently advanced LLMs? Gemini even, if you're
             | feeling lulz-y.
        
               | balder1991 wrote:
               | Yes, by spending money.
        
               | toomuchtodo wrote:
               | I agree, in some cases and depending on LLM endpoint,
               | some money may need to be spent to enable ripping. But is
               | it cheaper than paying Youtube/Google? That is the
               | question.
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | sometimes, it's not about the cost. it's about who/where
               | the money is being spent.
        
           | Beretta_Vexee wrote:
           | Once JavaScript is running, it can perform complex
           | fingerprinting operations that are difficult to circumvent
           | effectively.
           | 
           | I have a little experience with Selenium headless on
           | Facebook. Facebook tests fonts, SVG rendering, CSS support,
           | screen resolution, clock and geographical settings, and
           | hundreds of other things that give it a very good idea of
           | whether it's a normal client or Selenium headless. Since it
           | picks a certain number of checks more or less at random and
           | they can modify the JS each time it loads, it is very, very
           | complicated to simulate.
           | 
           | Facebook and Instagram know this and allow it below a certain
           | limit because it is more about bot protection than content
           | protection.
           | 
           | This is the case when you have a real web browser running in
           | the background. Here we are talking about standalone software
           | written in Python.
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | why can a bot dev not just get all of these values from the
             | laptop's settings and hardwire the headless version to have
             | the same values?
        
               | Beretta_Vexee wrote:
               | Because the expected values are not fixed, it is possible
               | to measure response times and errors to check whether
               | something is in the cache or not, etc.
               | 
               | There are a whole host of tricks relating to rendering
               | and positioning at the edge of the display window and
               | canvas rather than the window, which allow you to detect
               | execution without rendering.
               | 
               | To simulate all this correctly, you end up with a
               | standard browser, standard execution times, full
               | rendering in the background, etc. No one wants to
               | download their YouTube video at 1x speed and wait for the
               | adverts to finish.
        
             | cylemons wrote:
             | How does testing rendering work? Can javascript get pixel
             | data from the DOM
        
               | Beretta_Vexee wrote:
               | https://www.w3schools.com/tags/canvas_getimagedata.asp
        
         | Aperocky wrote:
         | And barely a few days after google did it the fix is in.
         | 
         | Amazing how they simply couldn't win - you deliver content to
         | client, the content goes to the client. Could be the largest
         | corporation of the world and we still have yt-dlp.
         | 
         | That's why all of them wanted proprietary walled gardens where
         | they would be able to control the client too - so you get to
         | watch the ads or pay up.
        
       | sphars wrote:
       | This will be interesting to see how it affects the numerous
       | Android apps on F-Droid that are essentially wrappers around yt-
       | dlp to create a YouTube Music clone.
        
       | BoredPositron wrote:
       | Ugh... Deno. After they started to extort the JS community for
       | money to fund their PR stunt against Oracle and the resulting
       | "last chance" trademark dispute, I stay as far away from it as I
       | can.
        
       | MangoToupe wrote:
       | At some point we're going to need a better place to put videos
       | than YouTube. The lack of any democratization of bulk storage is
       | beginning to be a real problem on the internet.
       | 
       | Yes, we have archive.org. We need more than that, though.
       | 
       | I'm sure there's some distributed solution like IPFS but I
       | haven't seen any serious attempt to make this accessible to every
       | day people.
        
         | zenmac wrote:
         | There are: peertube, odysee, minds, rumble, bitchute web
         | torrent)...
         | 
         | It is the same reason why people just can't get off IG. Network
         | effect and in YT case a lot of disk space and bandwidth.
        
           | MangoToupe wrote:
           | I don't think network effect matters much if you're not
           | trying to advertise the content. Organizations can just link
           | to it from their site.
           | 
           | I admit I haven't looked into peertube, and I didn't think
           | that rumble was any better than YouTube. I don't recognize
           | the others. Thank you; I'll resurvey.
        
         | coldpie wrote:
         | > The lack of any democratization of bulk storage is beginning
         | to be a real problem on the internet.
         | 
         | There are many thousands of paid hosting services, feel free to
         | pick one. It turns out hosting TB of data for free is a pretty
         | tricky business model to nail down.
        
           | superkuh wrote:
           | There have been plenty of free distributed hosting services
           | for the web that worked perfectly (popcorn time, etc, etc).
           | It's just that every time they become popular they are
           | attacked legally and shut down. The problem is not technical,
           | or even resource based, the problem is legal. Only a mega-
           | corp can withstand the legal attacks.
           | 
           | And even if the legal attacks could be mitigated most people
           | would still use youtube because they're there for the money
           | (or for people who are there for the money). They are not
           | there for a video host. Youtube enables distribution of money
           | and there's no way that any government would let any free
           | system distribute money without even more intense legal, and
           | indeed physically violent, attacks.
        
         | reaperducer wrote:
         | I keep seeing ads on TV for Photobucket (Which I thought was
         | dead) for 1TB of storage for either free, or $5, depending on
         | the ad.
         | 
         | Maybe there is an opportunity for that company to expand.
        
         | bob1029 wrote:
         | If you want to compete with YT you need to basically build AWS
         | S3 in your own data centers. You'd have to find a way to make
         | your service run cheaper than google can if you wanted to
         | survive. You'd have to get very scrappy and risky. I'd start
         | with questions like: how many 9s of durability do we actually
         | need here? Could we risk it until the model is proven? What are
         | the consequences for losing cat videos and any% speed runs of
         | mario64? That first robotic tape library would be a big
         | stepwise capex event. You'd want to make sure the whole thing
         | makes sense before you call IBM or whoever for a quote.
        
           | ndriscoll wrote:
           | Games Done Quick has raised 10s of millions for charity. I
           | suspect they could raise a few thousand for a few dozen TB of
           | nvme storage if they wanted to host a speedrun archive.
        
             | warkdarrior wrote:
             | YouTube get 700,000 hours of video uploaded _every day_.
             | That 's 4.3 PB added per day. You may need more than a few
             | dozen TB... https://www.reddit.com/r/AskProgramming/comment
             | s/vueyb9/how_...
        
               | ndriscoll wrote:
               | They don't get 700,000 hours of any particular niche
               | though, so it's easy enough for small groups to compete
               | with youtube for their needs.
        
           | jsheard wrote:
           | > If you want to compete with YT you need to basically build
           | AWS S3 in your own data centers. You'd have to find a way to
           | make your service run cheaper than google can if you wanted
           | to survive.
           | 
           | YouTube's economy of scale goes way beyond having their own
           | datacenters, they have edge caches installed inside most ISP
           | networks which soak up YT traffic before it even reaches a
           | Google DC. It would take a staggering amount of investment to
           | compete with them on cost.
        
         | pmdr wrote:
         | > I'm sure there's some distributed solution like IPFS
         | 
         | Almost 25 years on the internet and I have not been able to
         | download anything from IPFS. Does one need a PhD to do so?
        
         | mschuster91 wrote:
         | The problem with bulk storage is that it _will_ be abused at
         | large scale.
         | 
         | CSAM peddlers, intellectual property violators, unconsensual
         | sexual material ("revenge porn"), malware authors looking for
         | places to exfiltrate stolen data, propagandists and terrorists,
         | the list of abusers is as long as it is dire.
         | 
         | And for some of these abuser classes, the risk for any storage
         | service is high. Various jurisdictions require extremely fast
         | and thorough responses for a service provider to not be held
         | liable, sometimes with turnaround times of 24 hours or less (EU
         | anti terrorism legislation), sometimes with extremely steep
         | fines including prison time for responsible persons. Hell, TOR
         | exit node providers have had their homes raided and themselves
         | held in police arrest or, worse, facing criminal prosecution
         | and prison time particularly for CSAM charges - and these are
         | transit providers, not persistent storage.
         | 
         | And all of that's before looking on the infrastructure provider
         | side. Some will just cut you off when you're facing a DDoS
         | attack, some will bring in extortionate fees (looking at you,
         | AWS/GCE/Azure) for traffic that may leave you in personal
         | bankruptcy. And if you are willing to take that risk, you'll
         | still run the challenge of paying for the hardware itself -
         | storage isn't cheap, 20TB of storage will be around 200EUR and
         | you want some redundancy and backups, so the actual cost will
         | rather be 60-100EUR/TB plus the ongoing cost of electricity and
         | connectivity.
         | 
         | That's why you're not seeing much in terms of democratization.
        
           | MangoToupe wrote:
           | Maybe that's true, but YouTube is just absolutely miserable
           | to use in every way. There's got to be better options.
        
       | apetresc wrote:
       | The writing is on the wall for easy ripping. If there's any YT
       | content you expect you'll want to preserve for a long time, I
       | suggest spinning up https://www.tubearchivist.com/ or something
       | similar and archiving it now while you still can.
        
         | lyu07282 wrote:
         | They already had the proper-DRM tech for youtube movies for
         | years, why didn't they already turn that on for all content?
        
           | Mindwipe wrote:
           | YouTube's delivery scale is enormous and adding additional
           | complexity if they don't have to is probably considered a no
           | no.
           | 
           | But if they decide they have to, they can do it fairly
           | trivially.
        
           | trenchpilgrim wrote:
           | It would break many millions of old consumer devices that no
           | longer receive updates, like old smart TVs. They are waiting
           | for that old device traffic to drop low enough before they
           | can force more robust measures.
           | 
           | You already need such things for certain formats.
        
           | advisedwang wrote:
           | YT probably HAD to put the DRM on in order to get the license
           | deal with the studios. Nobody is twisting their arm as much
           | so other interests (wider audience, less server side
           | resources, not getting around to it) can prevail.
        
           | Elfener wrote:
           | They actually somewhat did: https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-
           | dlp/issues/12563 "DRM on ALL videos with tv (TVHTML5) client"
        
           | occz wrote:
           | It's not really a matter of just turning it on when it comes
           | to the kind of scale that YouTube has on their catalogue.
           | It's practically impossible to retranscode the whole
           | catalogue, so you're more or less stuck with only doing it
           | for newly ingested content, and even there the tradeoffs are
           | quite large when it comes to actually having DRM.
           | 
           | I think we can safely assume that the only content under DRM
           | at YouTube today is the content where it's absolutely legally
           | necessary.
        
         | wintermutestwin wrote:
         | I agree and feel that the time is now to archive all of the
         | truly valuable cultural and educational content that YT
         | acquired through monopolistic means.
         | 
         | This solution looks interesting, but I am technical enough to
         | know that this looks like a PITA to setup and maintain. It also
         | seems like it is focused on downloading everything from a
         | subbed channel.
         | 
         | As it is now, with a folder of downloaded videos, I just need a
         | local web server that can interpret the video names and create
         | an organized page with links. Is there anything like this that
         | is very lightweight with a next next finish install?
        
         | Liquix wrote:
         | pinchflat (https://github.com/kieraneglin/pinchflat) is an
         | alternative to tubearchivst. less mature but also less buggy
         | IME
        
       | feverzsj wrote:
       | That's why youtube is so buggy and slow.
        
       | ivanjermakov wrote:
       | Can we remove heartdropping mystery from the title? My first
       | thought is that Google makes it more difficult to download from
       | YouTube.
       | 
       | "yt-dlp moves to Deno runtime"
        
         | Fabricio20 wrote:
         | Google is making it harder to download from Youtube. Your first
         | thought is correct! Every other website that yt-dlp supports
         | doesn't require this change. Additionally, yt-dlp is still
         | written in python, it has not moved to deno. They are only
         | adding a deno dependency for the javascript challenges added by
         | youtube.
        
           | ivanjermakov wrote:
           | I get that, but still title is too "loud".
        
         | latexr wrote:
         | > "yt-dlp moves to Deno runtime"
         | 
         | That makes it seem like yt-dlp itself was rewritten from Python
         | to JavaScript (for those who even know it's Python) or that it
         | used to use Node and now uses Deno.
        
       | zelphirkalt wrote:
       | What I found much more annoying, and so far have not been able to
       | work around, is that yt-dlp requires you to have a YouTube
       | account, something that I have not had for a decade or so, and am
       | unwilling to create again.
       | 
       | What tool can I use to simply store what my browser receives
       | anyway, in a single video file?
        
         | skydhash wrote:
         | It must be a pretty recent (as in added yesterday) addition, as
         | I was watching youtube with mpv+yt-dlp.
        
         | degamad wrote:
         | When did it start requiring one? It didn't require one the last
         | time I used it a few months ago...
        
           | ACCount37 wrote:
           | Google started using IP range blocks recently. If they decide
           | that your IP stinks, they'll block YouTube viewing and demand
           | that you log in.
           | 
           | It's inconsistent as fuck, and even TOR exit nodes still work
           | without a log in sometimes.
        
             | astroflection wrote:
             | I can confirm this. I guess they didn't like me using
             | Invidious.
        
               | ACCount37 wrote:
               | That's bad enough for normal VPN users who use VPN for
               | privacy reasons. But a lot of countries have heavily
               | censored web, and not using a VPN is simply not an option
               | there.
               | 
               | Good on Google for kicking people while they're down.
        
           | zelphirkalt wrote:
           | I think for me it has been this way for a year or so. Maybe
           | it is because I am on a VPN. I also cannot view YouTube
           | videos on YouTube any longer, because it always wants me to
           | log in, to "prove I am not a bot". So I have switched to only
           | using invidious instances, and if they don't work, then I
           | just cannot watch the video.
           | 
           | I wish content creators would think of their own good more,
           | and start publishing on multiple platforms. Are there any
           | terms that YouTube has for them, that reduce revenue, if they
           | publish elsewhere as well? Or is it mostly just them being
           | unaware?
        
             | Telaneo wrote:
             | It's a VPN thing, or a 'you've been downloading too much
             | and are ratelimiting you' thing.
        
         | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
         | > What tool can I use to simply store what my browser receives
         | anyway, in a single video file?
         | 
         | This. I'm interested in such a tool or browser extension.
        
         | crtasm wrote:
         | I'm using it right now without a youtube account.
        
       | wraptile wrote:
       | Days of just getting data off the web are coming to an end as
       | everything requires a full browser running thousands of lines of
       | obfuscated js code now. So instead of a website giving me that
       | 1kb json that could be cached now I start a full browser stack
       | and transmit 10 megabytes through 100 requests, messing up your
       | analytics and security profile and everyone's a loser. Yay.
        
         | SV_BubbleTime wrote:
         | Do you know what Accelerate means?
         | 
         | I want them to go overboard. I want BigTech to go nuts on this
         | stuff. I want broken systems and nonsense.
         | 
         | Because that's the only way we're going to get anything better.
        
           | nananana9 wrote:
           | If you showed me the current state of YouTube 8 years ago -
           | multiple unskippable ads before each video, 5 midrolls for a
           | 10 minute video, comments overran with bots, video dislikes
           | hidden, the shorts hell, the dysfunctional algorithm, .... -
           | I would've definitely told you "Yep, that will be enough to
           | kill it!"
           | 
           | At this point I don't know - I still have the feeling that
           | "they just need to make it 50% worse again and we'll get a
           | competitor," but I've seen too many of these platforms get
           | 50% worse too many times, and the network effect wins out
           | every time.
        
             | encom wrote:
             | It's classic frog boiling. I want them (for whatever
             | definition of "them") to just nuke the frog from orbit.
        
           | jdiff wrote:
           | Accelerationism is a dead-end theory with major holes in its
           | core. Or I should say, "their" core, because there's a
           | million distant and mutually-incompatible varieties. Everyone
           | likes to say "gosh, things are awful, it MUST end in
           | collapse, and after the collapse everyone will see things MY
           | way." They can't all be right. And yet, all of them with
           | their varied ideas still think it'll be a good idea to
           | actively push to make things worse in order to bring on the
           | collapse more quickly.
           | 
           | It doesn't work. There aren't any collapses like that to be
           | had. Big change happens incrementally, a bit of refactoring
           | and a few band-aids at a time, and pushing to make things
           | worse doesn't help.
        
             | exe34 wrote:
             | I'm not waiting for the collapse to fix things - I'm
             | waiting for it so that I won't have any more distractions
             | and I can go back to my books.
        
               | jdiff wrote:
               | As I said, there aren't any collapses like that to be
               | had. Heaven and Earth will be moved to make the smallest
               | change necessary to keep things flowing as they were.
               | Banks aren't allowed to fail. Companies, despite lengthy
               | strings of missteps and billions burned on dead ends,
               | still remain on top.
               | 
               | You can step away from the world (right now, no waiting
               | required). But the world can remain irrational longer
               | than you can wait for it to step away from you, and
               | pushing for more irrationality won't make a dent in that.
        
               | exe34 wrote:
               | Oh I think the world will push me away at the next
               | Android update. If I can't
               | root/firewall/adblock/syncthing/koreader, the mobile
               | phone will simply become a phone again.
        
             | hnfong wrote:
             | Look at history, things improve and then things get worse,
             | in cycles.
             | 
             | During the "things get worse" phase, why not make it
             | shorter?
        
               | hobs wrote:
               | It doesn't foreshorten the cycle, it prolongs it and
               | makes it worse.
        
               | jancsika wrote:
               | Let's give it a shot.
               | 
               | The year is 2003. Svn and cvs are proving to be way too
               | clunky and slow for booming open source development.
               | 
               | As an ethical accelerationist, you gain commit access to
               | the repos for svn and cvs and make them _slower and less
               | reliable_ to accelerate progress toward better version
               | control.
               | 
               | Lo and behold, you _still_ have to wait until 2025 for
               | git to be released. Because git wasn 't written to
               | replace svn or cvs-- it was written as the result of
               | internal kernel politics wrt access to a closed-source
               | source management program Bitkeeper. And since svn and
               | cvs were already bad enough that kernel devs didn't
               | choose them, you making them worse wouldn't have affected
               | their choice.
               | 
               | Also, keep in mind that popularity of git was spurred by
               | tools that converted from svn to git. So by making svn
               | worse, you'd have made adoption of git harder by making
               | it harder on open source devs to write reliable
               | conversion tools.
               | 
               | To me, this philosophy looks worse than simply doing
               | nothing at all. And this is in a specific domain where
               | you could at least make a plausible, constrained argument
               | for accelerationism. Your comment instead seems to apply
               | to accelerationism applied to software in general--
               | there, the odds of you being right are so infinitesimal
               | as to be fatuous.
               | 
               | In short, you'd do better playing the lottery because at
               | least nothing bad happens to anyone else when you lose.
        
         | nananana9 wrote:
         | On the bright side, that opens an opportunity for 10,000
         | companies whose only activity is scraping 10MB worth of garbage
         | and providing a sane API for it.
         | 
         | Luckily all that is becoming a non-issue, as most content on
         | these websites isn't worth scraping anymore.
        
           | judge2020 wrote:
           | *and whose only customers are using it for AI training
        
         | pmdr wrote:
         | > Days of just getting data off the web are coming to an end
         | 
         | All thanks to great ideas like downloading the whole internet
         | and feeding it into slop-producing machines fueling global
         | warming in an attempt to make said internet obsolete and prop
         | up an industry bubble.
         | 
         | The future of the internet is, at best, bleak. Forget about
         | openness. Paywalls, authwalls, captchas and verification cans
         | are here to stay.
        
         | dpedu wrote:
         | And it's all to sell more ads.
        
         | bjourne wrote:
         | For now, yes, but soon CloudFlare and ever more annoying
         | captchas may make that option practically impossible.
        
           | nutjob2 wrote:
           | You should be thankful for the annoying captchas, I hear
           | they're moving to rectal scans soon.
        
         | daemin wrote:
         | This 1kb os json still sounds like a modern thing, where you
         | need to download many MB of JavaScript code to execute and
         | display the 1kb json data.
         | 
         | What you want is to just download the 10-20kb html file, maybe
         | a corresponding css file, and any images referenced by the
         | html. Then if you want the video you just get the video file
         | direct.
         | 
         | Simple and effective, unless you have something to sell.
        
           | pjc50 wrote:
           | The main reason for doing video through JS in the first
           | place, other than obfuscation, is variable bitrate support.
           | Oddly enough some TVs will support variable bitrate HLS
           | directly, and I believe Apple devices, but not regular
           | browsers. See https://github.com/video-dev/hls.js/
           | 
           | > unless you have something to sell
           | 
           | Video hosting and its moderation is not cheap, sadly. Which
           | is why we don't see many competitors.
        
             | Zopieux wrote:
             | And by "not many" you really mean _zero_ competitors.
             | 
             | (before you ask: Vimeo is getting sold to an
             | enshitification company)
        
               | axiolite wrote:
               | Those "zero" include: Rumble, Odysee, Dailymotion,
               | Twitch, Facebook watch... etc.
               | 
               | And a decent list here: https://ideaexplainers.com/video-
               | sites-like-youtube/
        
               | pjc50 wrote:
               | Twitch does live streaming but recently severely limited
               | the extent of free hosting for archived content.
               | 
               | Not actually heard of the first two, what's their USP?
        
         | pjc50 wrote:
         | I think this is just another indication of how the web is a
         | fragile equilibrium in a very adversarial ecosystem. And to
         | some extent, things like yt-dlp and adblocking only work if
         | they're "underground". Once they become popular - or there's a
         | commercial incentive, like AI training - there ends up being a
         | response.
        
         | einpoklum wrote:
         | Those days are not coming to an end:
         | 
         | * PeerTube and similar platforms for video streaming of freely-
         | distributable content;
         | 
         | * BitTorrent-based mechanisms for sharing large files (or
         | similar protocols).
         | 
         | Will this be inconvenient? At first, somewhat. But I am led to
         | believe that in the second category one can already achieve a
         | decent experience.
        
           | dotancohen wrote:
           | To how many content creators have you written to request them
           | share their content on PeerTube or BitTorrent? How did they
           | respond? How will they monetize?
        
             | einpoklum wrote:
             | 1. Zero
             | 
             | 2. N/A, but enough content creators on YT are very much
             | aware of the kind of prison it is, especially in the years
             | after the Adpocalypse.
             | 
             | 3. Obviously, nobody should be able to monetize the copying
             | of content. If it is released, it is publicly released. But
             | they can use LibrePay/Patreon/Buy me a coffee, they can
             | sell merch or signed copies of things, they can do live
             | appearances, etc.
        
         | xnx wrote:
         | It's an arms race. Websites have become
         | stupidly/unnecessarily/hostilely complicated, but AI/LLMs have
         | made it possible (though more expensive) to get whatever useful
         | information exists out of them.
         | 
         | Soon, LLMs will be able to complete any Captcha a human can
         | within reasonable time. When that happens, the "analog hole"
         | may be open permanently. If you can point a camera and a
         | microphone at it, the AI will be able to make better sense of
         | it than a person.
        
           | goku12 wrote:
           | Please remember that an LLM accessing any website isn't the
           | problem here. It's the scraping bots that saturate the server
           | bandwidth (a DoS attack of sorts) to collect data to train
           | the LLMs with. An LLM solving a captcha or an Anubis style
           | proof of work problem isn't a big concern here, because the
           | worst they're going to do with the collected data is to cache
           | them for later analysis and reporting. Unlike the crawlers,
           | LLMs don't have any incentives in sucking up huge amounts of
           | data like a giant vacuum cleaner.
        
         | mrsilencedogood wrote:
         | fortunately it is now easier than ever to do small-scale
         | scraping, the kind yt-dlp does.
         | 
         | I can literally just go write a script that uses headless
         | firefox + mitmproxy in about an hour or two of fiddling, and as
         | long as I then don't go try to run it from 100 VPS's and scrape
         | their entire website in a huge blast, I can typically archive
         | whatever content I actually care about. Basically no matter
         | what protection mechanisms they have in place. Cloudflare won't
         | detect a headless firefox at low (and by "low" I mean basically
         | anything you could do off your laptop from your home IP) rates,
         | modern browser scripting is extremely easy, so you can often
         | scrape things with mild single-person effort even if the site
         | is an SPA with tons of dynamic JS. And obviously at low scale
         | you can just solve captchas yourself.
         | 
         | I recently wrote a scraper script that just sent me a discord
         | ping whenever it ran into a captcha, and i'd just go look at my
         | laptop and fix it, and then let it keep scraping. I was
         | archiving a comic I paid for but was in a walled-garden app
         | that obviously didn't want you to even THINK of controlling the
         | data you paid for.
        
       | sharperguy wrote:
       | Why can youtube not just give a micropayments backed API? Just
       | charge a few cents per video download and be done with it.
        
         | eitau_1 wrote:
         | meanwhile Youtubers: a penny per view would be 10x what Youtube
         | pays us
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nloigkUJ-U&t=4851s
        
           | kccqzy wrote:
           | The YouTube RPM (revenue per mille) strongly depends on the
           | location of the audience and the topic of the video. It could
           | be anywhere from $0.5 to $20. That 10x figure could very well
           | be true for that YouTuber, but it's also true that other
           | YouTubers already earn more than a penny per view.
        
         | trenchpilgrim wrote:
         | They do. It's called YouTube Premium.
        
           | pmdr wrote:
           | AFAIK Premium allows you to download to persistent browser
           | storage. But is it DRM-free/open or usable format?
        
             | Telaneo wrote:
             | It's DRM-ed and somewhat broken.
        
               | raphman wrote:
               | According to [1], the downloaded video is AES-encrypted.
               | Decryption key is stored locally in an IndexDB. I tried
               | building a Python script using plyvel [2], a Python
               | module for reading IndexDB/LevelDB, some time ago but
               | IIRC, it had trouble reading the Chrome DB. Maybe
               | Google's dfindexeddb [3] works. I didn't try it, however.
               | 
               | [1] https://github.com/Marsel-marsel/youtube-premium-
               | video-downl...
               | 
               | [2] https://github.com/wbolster/plyvel
               | 
               | [3] https://github.com/google/dfindexeddb
        
           | yreg wrote:
           | It's not though. You can't download an mp4 to use however you
           | wish with YouTube Premium. And definitely not via an API.
        
             | trenchpilgrim wrote:
             | None of that was mentioned in the comment?
        
               | exe34 wrote:
               | did you miss the word "API"? it was there.
        
       | rcarmo wrote:
       | So, instead of using something lightweight and embeddable like
       | QuickJS, they opted for Deno? Nothing specifically against it,
       | just seems... overkill
        
         | Waraqa wrote:
         | See this comment:
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45359626
        
           | rcarmo wrote:
           | There are other embeddable JS engines out there.
        
             | ohdeargodno wrote:
             | And you're welcome to implement them and submit them as a
             | PR.
             | 
             | The yt-dlp contributors are not in the business of writing
             | or finding JS runtimes, they're trying to download videos.
        
             | myvoiceismypass wrote:
             | Hmm, like bun? Are there many others?
        
       | zb3 wrote:
       | Fortunately the community is not alone in this fight, because
       | many AI companies need to be able to download YT videos. But they
       | should sponsor yt-dlp more directly..
        
       | zelphirkalt wrote:
       | How will this JS execution be contained/isolated? Do we have to
       | run it inside a VM, or containers?
        
         | quux wrote:
         | They are running the JS in Deno, a sandboxed JS runtime.
        
       | BolexNOLA wrote:
       | What are folks thoughts on jdownloader2 these days? Hell is that
       | still kicking?
        
         | tommy92 wrote:
         | Yeah my go to for youtube still. Working as good as ever for
         | that so far.
        
         | Elfener wrote:
         | jdownloader2 is one of those weirdly licensed things, it claims
         | to be "open source" but you actually can't find the entire
         | source anywhere. Worse than proprietary, tbh.
        
       | nikcub wrote:
       | Just the other day there was a story posted on hn[0][1] that said
       | YouTube secretly wants downloaders to work.
       | 
       | It's it's always been very apparent that YouTube are doing _just
       | enough_ to stop downloads while also supporting a global audience
       | of 3 billion users.
       | 
       | If the world all had modern iPhones or Android devices you'd bet
       | they'd straight up DRM all content
       | 
       | [0] https://windowsread.me/p/best-youtube-downloaders
       | 
       | [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45300810
        
         | trenchpilgrim wrote:
         | More specifically, yt-dlp uses legacy API features supported
         | for older smart TVs which don't receive software updates.
         | Eventually once that traffic drops to near zero those features
         | will go away.
        
         | Aurornis wrote:
         | That conspiracy theory never even made sense to me. Why would
         | anyone think that a payment and ad-supported content platform
         | secretly wants their content to be leaked through ad and
         | payment free means?
        
           | judge2020 wrote:
           | Mainly the theory that, if you can't use downloaders to
           | download videos, then people will no longer see YT as the go-
           | to platform for any video hosting and will consider
           | alternatives.
           | 
           | And I call that a theory for a reason. Creators can still
           | download their videos from YT Studio, I'm not sure how much
           | importance there is on being able to download any video ever
           | (and worst case scenario people could screen recording
           | videos)
        
             | Liquix wrote:
             | i'd argue that 95%+ of users (creators and viewers)
             | couldn't care less about downloading videos. creators use
             | youtube because it's where the viewers and money are,
             | viewers use youtube because it's where all the content is.
             | none of them are going to jump ship if yt-dlp dies.
             | 
             | also, one could assume that the remaining 5% are either
             | watching with vlc/mpv/etc or running an adblocker. so it's
             | not like google is going to lose ad revenue by breaking
             | downloaders like yt-dlp. grandparent comment (legacy smart
             | TV support) is the much more likely explanation
        
               | dredmorbius wrote:
               | It's not the 95% you're concerned about, it's the 1%, or
               | 0.0001%, who are top content creators, who both archive
               | their _own_ production and use YT as a research tool
               | themselves (whether simple  "reply videos" or something
               | more substantive). Ultimately Google will kill the goose
               | and lose the eggs.
               | 
               | Those creators are what drive the the bulk of viewers to
               | the platform.
               | 
               | Though, come to think of it, as YT's become increasingly
               | obnoxious to use (the native Web client is utterly
               | intolerable, front-ends such as Invidious are
               | increasingly fragile/broken, yt-dlp is as TFA notes
               | becoming bogged down in greater dependencies) I simply
               | find myself watching (or as my preference generally is,
               | _listening_ ) to far less from the platform.
               | 
               | I may be well ahead of the pack, but others may reach
               | similar conclusions in 5--10 years. Or when a less-
               | annoying alternative clearly presents itself.
        
           | attila-lendvai wrote:
           | being a de facto monopoly has a lot of value that is hard to
           | quantify...
           | 
           | e.g. censorship, metadata, real time society-wide trends,
           | etc...
           | 
           | google is way-way more than just a company.
        
       | elcapitan wrote:
       | Is there an official name for this endless uphill battle?
       | Counter-Enshittification?
        
         | layer8 wrote:
         | Cleaning the Augean stables.
        
       | phplovesong wrote:
       | Youtube is the real monopoly. Creators are also slaves, as they
       | cant monetize elsewhere, and also they cant let their users
       | download their own content. And the icing on the cake is youtube
       | is unbearable without an ad-blocker, and even with that youtube
       | has started throttling ad-block users.
       | 
       | Its such a shithole, with no real replacement, sad state of
       | affairs.
        
         | mavhc wrote:
         | why can't they monetize elsewhere?
        
           | layer8 wrote:
           | Much, much, much smaller audience elsewhere.
        
             | pessimizer wrote:
             | And if the audiences got larger on a site, governments
             | around the world would decide together to drag them into
             | court and keep them there until they closed down or sold to
             | Ellison's kid.
        
           | trenchpilgrim wrote:
           | > Here's the problem (and it's not insurmountable): right
           | now, there's no easy path towards sustainable content
           | production when the audience for the content is 100x smaller,
           | and the number of patrons/sponsors remains proportionally the
           | same.
           | 
           | https://www.jeffgeerling.com/blog/2025/self-hosting-your-
           | own...
        
           | HankStallone wrote:
           | Some do, and those who are able to make the move to patronage
           | or subscriber monetization seem much happier for it. But
           | that's most viable for creators who have already built up a
           | viable customer base, which usually started on YouTube. It's
           | much harder if you start out somewhere else.
        
       | random29ah wrote:
       | It's almost funny, not to mention sad, that their player/page has
       | been changed, filling it with tons of JS that makes less powerful
       | machines lag.
       | 
       | For a while now, I've been forced to change "watch?v=" to
       | "/embed/" to watch something in 480p on an i3 Gen 4, where the
       | same video, when downloaded, uses ~3% of the CPU.
       | 
       | However, unfortunately, it doesn't always work anymore.
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvFZjo5PgG0
       | https://www.youtube.com/embed/xvFZjo5PgG0
       | 
       | While they worsen the user experience, other sites optimize their
       | players and don't seem to care about downloaders (pr0n sites, for
       | example).
        
         | skydhash wrote:
         | Put that next to GitHub. The app is nearly unusable on an i5
         | 8th, often I just download a snapshot to browse locally.
        
         | bArray wrote:
         | Personally I am looking to get away from Youtube and looking
         | towards some form of PeerTube/peer-based platform.
        
         | oybng wrote:
         | You are not alone. In Q1 2025 I was forced to adopt the embed
         | player. In Q3 2025, google intentionally broke the embed
         | player. Now the only youtube access I have is via yt-dlp. Long
         | live yt-dlp and its developers
        
         | Too wrote:
         | Many performance problems on YouTube are because they now force
         | everyone to use the latest heavy codecs, even when your
         | hardware does not have acceleration for it. I have a laptop
         | that is plenty powerful for everything else and plays 4K h264
         | no problem. 720p on YouTube on the other hand turns it into a
         | hot slate after a minute and grinds everything to a halt.
         | 
         | There are browser extensions like h264ify that block newer
         | codecs but WHY??? Is nobody at YouTube caring about the user
         | experience? It's easier and more reliable to just download the
         | videos.
        
       | jhatemyjob wrote:
       | Might as well start an effort to rewrite the whole project in
       | Javascript at this point
        
       | DrStartup wrote:
       | none of it will matter soon. anything you want to see or watch
       | will be dynamically generated just for you. enders game is here.
        
         | HelloUsername wrote:
         | What if I want to rewatch it, offline?
        
         | hooverd wrote:
         | why would I want that?
        
       | AbuAssar wrote:
       | on why they chose Deno instead of node:
       | 
       | "Other JS runtimes (node/bun) could potentially be supported in
       | the future, the issue is that they do not provide the same
       | security features and sandboxing that deno has. You would be
       | running untrusted code on your machine with full system access.
       | At this point, support for other JS runtimes is still TBD, but we
       | are looking in to it."
        
         | codedokode wrote:
         | While deno has sandboxing, it also has potential access to
         | hundreds of dangerous functions, it might be better just to
         | write a tiny wrapper around JS engine that adds only the
         | function to write to stdout.
        
           | AbuAssar wrote:
           | Deno blocks by default the access to network, storage and
           | environment variables
        
             | codedokode wrote:
             | JS interpreter doesn't have the access at all - it is
             | provided by native functions, added by the wrapper like
             | deno, so there is nothing to block.
        
       | nromiun wrote:
       | TIL that you can run frontend Javascript with a package like
       | Deno. I thought you need a proper headless browser for it.
        
         | skydhash wrote:
         | I think you only need something like `jsdom` to have the core
         | API available. The DOM itself is just a tree structure with
         | special nodes. Most APIs are optional and you can provide stubs
         | if you're targeting a specific websites. It's not POSIX level.
        
         | bob1029 wrote:
         | I was thinking the same walking into this thread. I figured
         | DOM/CSS/HTML would be part of the black box magic, but I
         | suppose from the perspective of JS all of that can be faked
         | appropriately.
        
       | bArray wrote:
       | Ronsor [1] and reply by seproDev:
       | 
       | > Why can't we embed a lightweight interpreter such as QuickJS?
       | 
       | > @Ronsor #14404 (comment)
       | 
       | The linked comment [2]:
       | 
       | > @dirkf This solution was tested with QuickJS which yielded
       | execution times of >20 minutes per video
       | 
       | How on earth can it be that terrible compared to Deno?
       | 
       | [1] https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-
       | dlp/issues/14404#issuecomment-3...
       | 
       | [2] https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-
       | dlp/issues/14404#issuecomment-3...
        
         | jlokier wrote:
         | _> How on earth can it be that terrible [ >20 minutes] compared
         | to Deno?_
         | 
         | QuickJS uses a bytecode interpreter (like Python, famously
         | slow), and is optimised for simplicity and correctness. Whereas
         | Deno uses a JIT compiler (like Java, .NET and WASM). Deno uses
         | the same JIT compiler as Chrome, one of the most heavily-
         | optimised in the world.
         | 
         | That doesn't normally lead to such a large factor in time
         | difference, but it explains most of it, and depending on the
         | type of code being run, it could explain all of it in this
         | case.
         | 
         | QuickJIT (a fork of QuickJS that uses TCC for JIT) might yield
         | better results, but still slower than Deno.
        
           | ynx wrote:
           | JIT is still banned by policy on a LOT of mobile devices,
           | meaning that previous usage of yt-dlp on mobile is now
           | effectively unsupportable.
        
             | SpaghettiCthulu wrote:
             | I haven't tested this, but in theory running deno with
             | `--v8-flags='--jitless'`[^1][^2] will disable the JIT
             | compiler.
             | 
             | [^1]: https://v8.dev/blog/jitless
             | 
             | [^2]: https://docs.deno.com/runtime/getting_started/command
             | _line_i...
        
               | Klonoar wrote:
               | If the performance drops due to lack of JIT, then GPs
               | comment about effectively useless on mobile might still
               | hold weight.
        
             | 1317 wrote:
             | well yt-dlp would also be banned surely? so it's not an
             | issue anyway
        
           | bArray wrote:
           | My concern is either that QuickJS is something like 100x
           | slower, or that even when using Deno, the download experience
           | will be insanely slow.
           | 
           | In my mind, an acceptable time for users might be 30 seconds
           | (somewhat similar to watching an ad). If QuickJS is taking
           | >20 minutes, then it is some 40x slower? Seems very high?
           | 
           | > QuickJIT (a fork of QuickJS that uses TCC for JIT) might
           | yield better results, but still slower than Deno.
           | 
           | Interesting, not come across it before. Running C code seems
           | like an insane workaround from a security perspective.
        
         | ronsor wrote:
         | It's horrifying and Google must've worked very hard to kill the
         | performance in other interpreters.
        
           | lucianbr wrote:
           | The brightest minds (or something close) working hard to make
           | computation slower and more difficult, so that someone can
           | profit more.
        
         | darknavi wrote:
         | That is interesting. We use QuickJS in Minecraft (Bedrock, for
         | modding) and while it's much slower than V8 it's not _that_
         | much slower.
        
       | beyondcompute wrote:
       | Why won't they use my browser for downloads, for example through
       | TestCafe? That would also allow downloading premium quality (for
       | subscribers) and so on.
        
         | rfl890 wrote:
         | I think you can get premium formats through the --cookies-from-
         | browser flag
        
       | phendrenad2 wrote:
       | Good to see the mice are still winning the cat-and-mouse game.
       | Selfishly, I kind of want the cat to start to win, to satisfy my
       | curiosity. I predict that if YouTube ever _actually_ blocked
       | downloading, a YouTube competitor that supports downloading would
       | start to immediately gain popularity. I want to know if I 'm
       | right about that, and there's no way to test unless Google
       | actually starts to win. Go, Google, go! I believe in you!
        
         | codedokode wrote:
         | Those who download videos are a minority and targeting
         | minorities will never give you exponential growth. Furthermore,
         | the same minority probably abuses ad blockers so it would be
         | difficult to squeeze a single cent from these freeloaders.
        
           | mejutoco wrote:
           | > targeting minorities will never give you exponential growth
           | 
           | Serving a niche is a very good way to start with many
           | products. It is even common gospel in startups. With the rest
           | I agree.
        
         | amlib wrote:
         | I suspect that if youtube ever fully blocks video downloads you
         | will start to see a lot of piracy groups and file sharing
         | communities providing youtube content.
        
       | Alifatisk wrote:
       | The length Youtube have gone to make it impossible to download
       | videos. At the same time, Tiktok allows anyone to download a
       | video with just right click
        
         | doublerabbit wrote:
         | With the recent forced buy of TikTok with Rupert, Larry and co,
         | I doubt that's going to be a thing for much longer; they will
         | want to make money some how.
        
         | latexr wrote:
         | On the other hand, I can navigate, search, and watch any video
         | on YouTube without an account. With TikTok, I can't even scroll
         | the page without tricks.
        
       | benoau wrote:
       | Came across this the other day - set of yt-dlp helper scripts
       | loaded up with flags:
       | 
       | https://github.com/TheFrenchGhosty/TheFrenchGhostys-Ultimate...
        
       | novoreorx wrote:
       | Surprisingly, Deno was chosen as the first JavaScript runtime due
       | to its security features. I thought it was almost dead, as Bun is
       | growing very quickly among developers.
        
       | RiverCrochet wrote:
       | A friend of mine recorded a YouTube video using OBS. She had to
       | do some minor edits on it and could not use her system during the
       | recording, but it worked. I told her to stop it, as that is
       | infringing on the creator's copyright and is an assault on the
       | nation's digital economy. She hasn't recorded a video since, at
       | least not that I know about. I feel good about making sure
       | YouTube can reasonably profit off of creators' content since they
       | give away the storage and access for free.
        
         | smiley1437 wrote:
         | Instructions on Vine-glo grape concentrate during prohibition:
         | "Do not place the liquid in this jug and put it away in the
         | cupboard for twenty-one days, because then it would turn into
         | wine."
        
           | RiverCrochet wrote:
           | I had another friend that simply recorded YouTube videos from
           | their smartphone. As a zealous law abiding citizen, I
           | immediately smacked the phone out of his hand and lectured on
           | how copyright law is the foundation of the Information Age,
           | which is the future, and disregarding it is an affront to
           | modern life and civilization. I made him delete all his
           | videos, and even made him hand write letters of apologies to
           | the YouTube creators. These creators don't reveal their home
           | addresses, but I'm sure they appreciated the emails
           | containing the scan of the handwritten letters.
           | 
           | We have an old SCSI scanner, so it took about as long to scan
           | it as it did to write it.
        
         | danlugo92 wrote:
         | Touche
        
       | sombragris wrote:
       | Many Linux distros have Firefox's JavaScript (SpiderMonkey?)
       | runtime independently packaged and available. Can it be used for
       | this?
        
         | silverwind wrote:
         | Yes, Spidermonkey can be ran standalone and would probably be
         | much more secure than Deno would be because it does not have
         | all the server-related APIs.
        
       | Havoc wrote:
       | Really feels like the somewhat open nature of yt is running on
       | borrowed time
        
         | hackingonempty wrote:
         | First you spend money to create something people really want
         | and build a big user base.
         | 
         | Then you open it up to third party businesses and get them tied
         | to your platform, making money off your users.
         | 
         | Once locked in you turn the screws on the businesses to extract
         | as much money from them as possible.
         | 
         | Finally you turn the screws on the users to extract every last
         | bit of value from the platform before it withers and fades into
         | irrelevance.
        
           | akudha wrote:
           | What you say is true for most companies/software, but YouTube
           | can play a nasty game for a very long time before it withers
           | into irrelevance (if at all). They have enormous moat, one
           | would need enormous resources to take on YouTube, I don't
           | think anyone has that kind of patience or resources to even
           | attempt. Like it or not, we are stuck with YT for a while.
           | 
           | I have learned so much from YouTube - I wish it was more open
           | and friendly to its creators and users :(
           | 
           | In the meantime, all we can do is support smaller
           | alternatives like https://nebula.tv/
        
       | buyucu wrote:
       | I was scared this morning when yt-dlp did not work, but a git
       | pull fixed it.
       | 
       | A huge thank you to the yt-dlp folks. They do amazing work.
        
       | guywithahat wrote:
       | It's incredible how much work goes into these open source
       | projects for downloading youtube videos, especially since youtube
       | keeps breaking them. There are nearly 1500 contributors
        
         | jsheard wrote:
         | To be fair yt-dlp supports a lot more than just YouTube
         | 
         | https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/tree/master/yt_dlp/extracto...
        
       | zahlman wrote:
       | Noteworthy to me: deno is MIT licensed, but PyPI distributions
       | (at least the ones I checked) include neither license nor source
       | code. It's normal for pre-built distributions ("wheels") to
       | contain only the Python code (which for a project like this is
       | just a small bootstrap used to find the compiled executable -- it
       | doesn't appear to be providing any Python API), but they should
       | normally still have a LICENSE file.
       | 
       | It's also common to have the non-Python (here, Rust) source in
       | source distributions ("sdists"), but this project's sdist is only
       | a few kilobytes and basically functions as a meta-package (and
       | also includes no license info). It "builds" Deno by detecting the
       | platform, downloading a corresponding zip from the GitHub
       | releases page, extracting the standalone Rust executable, and
       | then letting Hatchling (a popular build tool in the Python
       | ecosystem) repackage that in a wheel.
       | 
       | Update: It turns out that the Python package is published by a
       | third party, so I submitted an issue
       | (https://github.com/manzt/denop/issues/1) to ask about the
       | licensing.
        
         | zahlman wrote:
         | (Update 2: the distribution has been updated. Thanks to Trevor
         | Manz for an unexpectedly prompt response!)
        
       | abaa88_ wrote:
       | Viva Revanced!
        
       | oybng wrote:
       | more dependency bloat just to deobfuscate some randomly generated
       | bs that's increasingly complex for no reason and has no value
       | existing in the first place, much like its creators
        
       | dandiep wrote:
       | I've been using yt-dlp to download transcripts. Are there
       | alternatives that don't require going through all these hoops?
       | I'm guessing no.
        
       | zeristor wrote:
       | I did download YouTube videos a few years ago, I did value that
       | YouTube could keep your place.
       | 
       | But it's a real mess it keeps crashing, something I might too
       | humbly put down to me having too many files, but passive
       | aggressively put it down to YouTube on iPad not having a limited
       | amount of storage space.
       | 
       | On the other hand there's a number of amazing videos I've
       | downloaded to watch which have been remotely wiped. Grrr
        
       | syrusakbary wrote:
       | I wonder if they could use Wasmer to execute Javascript under the
       | hood without limitations.
        
       | porphyra wrote:
       | At this rate they are just gonna have to ship a whole web browser
       | with it lol.
        
       | scosman wrote:
       | Great ad for deno. I hit a similar one the other day from
       | pydantic. They make a MCP server for running sandboxed python
       | code and the they did that... Python to WASM, and wasm running in
       | deno.
        
       | anthk wrote:
       | I refuse to run JS on my n270 netbook; even less with a
       | propietary license. Thus, I will just use some invidious mirror.
        
       | jokoon wrote:
       | Youtube is victim of its success
       | 
       | I don't promote piracy, but it seems that it's easier to download
       | music from youtube than using torrents, which is quite
       | surprising.
       | 
       | Who expected that such a big company would contribute to piracy?
        
       | ddtaylor wrote:
       | When I first got with my wife I seemed a bit crazier than I am
       | because I am a media hoarder for 30+ years. I don't have any VHS,
       | DVDs, etc. laying around because I only keep digital copies, but
       | I have pretty decent archives. Nothing important really, just
       | normal stuff and some rare or obscure stuff that disappears over
       | time.
       | 
       | My wife was interested in the idea that I was running "Netfix
       | from home" and enjoyed the lack of ads or BS when we watched any
       | content. I never really thought I would be an "example" or
       | anything like that - I fully expected everyone else to embrace
       | streaming for the rest of time because I didn't think those
       | companies would make so many mistakes. I've been telling people
       | for the last decade "That's awesome I watch using my own thing,
       | what shows are your favorites I want to make sure I have them"
       | 
       | In the last 2 years more family members and friends have
       | requested access to my Jellyfin and asked me to setup a similar
       | setup with less storage underneath their TV in the living room or
       | in a closet.
       | 
       | Recently-ish we have expanded our Jellyfin to have some YouTube
       | content on it. Each channel just gets a directory and gets this
       | command ran:                   yt-dlp "$CHANNEL_URL" \
       | --download-archive "downloaded.txt" \           --playlist-end 10
       | \           --match-filters "live_status = 'not_live' &
       | webpage_url!*='/shorts/' & original_url!*='/shorts/'" \
       | -f "bv*[height<=720]+ba/b[height<=720]" \           --merge-
       | output-format mp4 \           -o "%(upload_date>%Y-%m-%d)s -
       | %(title)s.%(ext)s"
       | 
       | It actually fails to do what I want here and download h264
       | content so I have it re-encoded since I keep my media library in
       | h264 until the majority of my devices support h265, etc. None of
       | that really matters because these YouTube videos come in AV1 and
       | none of my smart TVs support that yet AFAIK.
        
         | entropie wrote:
         | First I ran a simple script, now I use ytdltt [1] to allow my
         | mother via telegram bot to download YT videos (in her case its
         | more like audiobooks) and sort them in directories so she can
         | access/download it via jellyfin. Shes at around 1.2TB
         | audiobooks in like 3 years.
         | 
         | 1: https://github.com/entropie/ytdltt
        
         | binaryturtle wrote:
         | Tried this: "yt-dlp -f
         | 'bestvideo*[ext=mp4]+bestaudio[ext=m4a]/best[ext=mp4]/best' -S
         | vcodec:h264 -other_options ..." ? I'm still getting proper h264
         | with that (my Raspberry PI 3 only wants a proper codec too...
         | none of that mushy new-era codec stuff. ;) )
        
         | rasz wrote:
         | >fails to do what I want here and download h264 content
         | 
         | you are missing [vcodec^=avc1] ?
        
         | axiolite wrote:
         | > It actually fails to do what I want here and download h264
         | content so I have it re-encoded
         | 
         | I struggled with that myself (yt-dlp documentation could use
         | some work). What's currently working for me is:
         | yt-dlp -f "bestvideo[width<800][vcodec~='^(avc|h264)']+bestaudi
         | o[acodec~='^((mp|aa))']"
        
         | herzzolf wrote:
         | I recently discovered Pinchflat [1], which seems like an *arr-
         | inspired web alternative, and works great for me - I just need
         | to add the videos I want downloaded to a playlist and it picks
         | them up. Also uses yt-dlp under the hood.
         | 
         | 1. https://github.com/kieraneglin/pinchflat
        
         | werid wrote:
         | use the new preset feature to get h264: -t mp4
         | 
         | you can also skip the match filters by running the /videos URL
         | instead of the main channel url.
         | 
         | if you want 720p, use -S res:720
        
         | getcrunk wrote:
         | Do you have to put in cookies to avoid the sign in/bot prompt?
         | Do you use a vpn to download yt videos?
        
         | ticoombs wrote:
         | Checkout https://github.com/meeb/tubesync
        
       | ddtaylor wrote:
       | I would be really interested in hearing what Mike Hearn has to
       | say about this. AFAIK he was responsible for something very
       | similar that was used at Google for other products that had some
       | overlap.
        
       | charcircuit wrote:
       | This change has been long overdue. The web player has been broken
       | with yt-dlp for such a long time.
        
       | icyfox wrote:
       | The folks at deno have really done a fantastic job at pushing a
       | JS runtime forward in a way that's more easily plug and play for
       | the community. I've used `denoland/deno_core` and
       | `denoland/rusty_v8` quite a bit in embedded projects where I need
       | full JS support but I can't assume users have node/bun/etc
       | installed locally.
       | 
       | Not surprised to see yt-dlp make a similar choice.
        
       | kgdbx wrote:
       | That seems a lot of dev work, why not just run in browser then?
       | There are extensions that work pretty well, like Tubly
       | downloader, Video DownloadHelper.
        
       | chrsw wrote:
       | The whole point of YouTube (now) is it's a market for human
       | attention and behavior. Eyeballs, engagements, tracking and
       | analytics. They will go to great lengths to protect and increase
       | the value of this market.
        
       | oybng wrote:
       | amazing how posts critical of google quickly fall off the front
       | page during north american hours
        
       | lxgr wrote:
       | > Up until now, yt-dlp has been able to use its built-in
       | JavaScript "interpreter" [1]
       | 
       | Wow, this is equal parts fascinating and horrifying.
       | 
       | Edit, after looking into it a bit: It seems like a self-contained
       | build of deno weighs in at around 40 MB (why?), so I can see why
       | they tried to avoid that and appreciate the effort.
       | 
       | [1] https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-
       | dlp/blob/2025.09.23/yt_dlp/jsin...
        
       | cakealert wrote:
       | Why are they using the web target? YouTube has multiple other
       | attack vectors which have no javascript barriers.
       | 
       | Plenty of devices have YouTube players which are not being
       | capable of being updated and which must work, exploit those APIs.
        
       | AndyKelley wrote:
       | This is very related to a talk I did last year [1]. "Part 2:
       | youtube-dl" starts at 18:21. It dips toes into an analysis about
       | software that fundamentally depends on ongoing human labor to
       | maintain (as compared to, e.g. zlib, which is effectively "done"
       | for all intents and purposes).
       | 
       | More concretely, the additional Deno dependency is quite
       | problematic for my music player, especially after I did all that
       | work to get a static, embeddable CPython built [2].
       | 
       | Ideally for me, yt-dlp would be packaged into something trivially
       | embeddable and sandboxable, such as WebAssembly, calling into
       | external APIs for things like networking[3]. This would reduce
       | the value delivered by the yt-dlp project into pure DRM-defeating
       | computation, leaving concerns such as CLI/GUI to a separate group
       | of maintainers. A different project could choose to fulfill those
       | dependencies with Deno, or Rust, or as in my case, built directly
       | into a music player in Zig.
       | 
       | Of course I don't expect the yt-dlp maintainers to do that.
       | They're doing something for fun, for free, for pride, for self-
       | respect... in any case their goals aren't exactly perfectly
       | aligned with mine, so if I want to benefit from their much
       | appreciated labor, I have to provide the computational
       | environment that they depend on (CPython[4] and Deno).
       | 
       | But yeah, that's now going to be a huge pain in the ass because
       | now I either have to drop support for yt-dlp in my music player,
       | or additionally embed deno, as well as introduce Rust as a build
       | dependency... neither of which I find acceptable. And don't even
       | get me started on Docker.
       | 
       | [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCLrNqc9jdE
       | 
       | [2]: https://github.com/allyourcodebase/cpython
       | 
       | [3]: https://ziglang.org/news/goodbye-cpp/
       | 
       | [4]: https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/issues/9674
        
       | sedatk wrote:
       | 2045:
       | 
       | "yt-dlp needs a copy of your digitized prefrontal cortex in order
       | to bypass Youtube's HumanizeWeb brain scanner"
        
       | UltraSane wrote:
       | I would pay for YouTube if Google created the best possible
       | search engine they could for it. I'm talking inverted and
       | semantic indexing of every word of every video with speaker
       | tagging and second level timestamping. I want to be able to runs
       | queries like "Give me the timestamps of every time Veritasium
       | said math while wearing a blue shirt."
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-09-24 23:00 UTC)