889
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by mesamunefire@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] erenkoylu@lemmy.ml 5 points 8 hours ago

get newpipe and ublock origin if you want to screw with google:

https://newpipe.net/

https://ublockorigin.com/

[-] pkmkdz@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

Alt nominations:
Grayjay (Android)
Freetube (PC)

[-] Psythik@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago

Is this the reason why SmartTubeNext keeps breaking on my TV? The updates come pretty quickly but it's getting annoying cause my $1800 OLED has the processing power of a $50 Chinese Android phone and thus takes forever to install updates.

[-] foremanguy92_@lemmy.ml 40 points 1 day ago

We need to slowdown YouTube and get an alternative that is viable for people and creators. The problem in this case is creators and brands, almost no creators would continue doing videos if there's no money at the end

[-] Teils13@lemmy.eco.br 6 points 20 hours ago

There is the PeerTube network, which works like Lemmy.

[-] foremanguy92_@lemmy.ml 3 points 19 hours ago

This is one the best YouTube alternative but needs to be adopt massively

[-] meldrik@lemmy.wtf 6 points 17 hours ago

Start using it and ask content creators to also put their content on there.

[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 18 points 1 day ago

The problem with money being involved is it's an invitation to spam crap everywhere.

One of my relatives has recently taken up "AI travel videos" and "AI cute videos" as a "hobby". No doubt based on the first thing that came up when I searched for those things, a video titled "make $10,000 a month spamming up YouTube with your AI slop".

Oh, and it needs you to buy the AI slop generating tools that they happen to sell. How convenient!

I mean, this also happened with broadcast TV, where we suddenly went from like 4 channels filled with programs and things competing for space, to 200 channels, where the rush was on to fill the gaps between the adverts as cheaply as possible with reality show tat. And that's all YouTube is now.

[-] anon_8675309@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago

The other problem is storage and bandwidth.

[-] foremanguy92_@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 day ago

The solution is decentralization of the web

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] sentientity@lemm.ee 7 points 1 day ago

It's subscription based, but Nebula is creator owned I believe. Sucks though that everything free gets acquired by some extractive company.

[-] x00za@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 day ago

Odysee is actually doing amazing. The interface is great and the speed is even better than Youtube at the moment.

They are however swithing their core structure from one blockchain powered storage model to another one, so at the moment it's a bit guesswork and could possibly turn out very bad. (ArWeave bought them...)

Regarding the far right content on the platform; yes, there is a bit of it, but I have only once come across it, and I was actually browsing some categories relating to politics. So in normal usage, following content creators and checking what Odysee is featuring, you'll not come across them. But even if you do, Odysee's block/mute functionality works better than the one on YouTube.

[-] Doburoku@lemmy.world 7 points 20 hours ago

Nah a little alt right content is entirely too much.

[-] x00za@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 19 hours ago

Freedom of speech for me but not for thee

[-] 0x0@infosec.pub 4 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

See that's the cute thing.They can have their free speech right there, but freedom also means the for most people obvious choice not to associate with nazis and other similiar troglodytes.

And as you said yourself, it already seems to be a popular hole for said miscreants, so why even bother with it.

[-] x00za@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 13 hours ago

As I said, you don't even notice them except if you look for them.

Odysee also has very good block/muting, much better than that of YouTube.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Etterra@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Something community owned and a non-profit would be good.

[-] gallopingsnail@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 day ago

They're already halfway there /s

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] bruhsoulz@lemmy.ml 6 points 22 hours ago

This sux big time, been using grayjay and it seems to be working alright thus far

[-] joe_cool@lemmy.ml 3 points 16 hours ago

That's because it's all local to your device.

[-] where_am_i@sh.itjust.works 34 points 1 day ago

The other day someone on lemmy kept trying to tell me that if google wanted to shut down ad blocking they would. But they don't, so it's ok.

Lol, spawn me that person plz.

[-] FartsWithAnAccent@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

AdBlocking is 100% OK, that part is correct for sure. Ad networks (including Google's) routinely serve up scams and malware: It is foolish not to use a browser with a fully functional ad blocker at this point (i.e. avoid Chrome, use Firefox with uBlock origin).

As for whether Google approves: Fuck Google! They have been serving up malware and scams in their ads. Their opinion should be irrelevant if you have any interest in protecting yourself, they have repeatedly proven they cannot and should not be trusted.

[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 4 points 22 hours ago

If Google takes money to host an ad that's malware, they should be able to be prosecuted for it.

This is different than simply hosting community content that they can't reasonably moderate. They're being given money to distribute these ads, so they can afford to moderate them.

Which should be easy anyway. Ads shouldn't be able to install third-party shit from the advertisers on user computers. Google can easily restrict what can be included on an ad package.

[-] Rider@eviltoast.org 5 points 1 day ago

Yes at this point why would any person would care what Google thinks? Google can go fuck themselves.

[-] ISOmorph@feddit.org 143 points 1 day ago

I've seen the effects on invidious these past days. 8 in 10 instances have been broken. Google is putting some serious work into shutting alternate frontends down. Shows you how much of a dent they're putting in the bottom line.

[-] Zorque@lemmy.world 62 points 1 day ago

Shows you how much of a dent they’re putting in the bottom line.

Or how desperate google execs are to get even the tiniest bump in revenue.

[-] Zidane@lemmy.world 32 points 1 day ago

LINE MUST GO UP AT ALL TIMES

load more comments (14 replies)
[-] art@lemmy.world 59 points 1 day ago

I'm a YouTube creator, part of the partner program, and I also manually upload to TILvids. The videos I make generate about $100-$300 a year through the partner program, so I'm not a professional by any means. It feels like they're trying to keep creators from leaving by putting up small roadblocks that limit our reach beyond the platform. Given PeerTube's non-profit model, I see it as a potential future for content sharing. Though there are a few rock stars on YouTube, most of the creators on that platform make little to no money from publishing videos. There are more people like me than Linus Media Group.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] melroy@kbin.melroy.org 103 points 1 day ago

It's about time we try to de-google.

load more comments (20 replies)
[-] archomrade@midwest.social 24 points 1 day ago

I'm honestly surprised peertube has lasted as long as it has as it is

[-] dsilverz@thelemmy.club 23 points 1 day ago

It still lasts because there's no easy way YT can offer their own content without the video being available as a file stream (through CDNs at googlevideos subdomains). If they centralize everything to a single, controlled domain (so to allow things as one-time HTTPS request, better session checking and so on), they'd lost the capability of load balancing allowed by the decentralized nature of CDNs. YouTube downloaders (and, by extension, third-party YT frontends such as Invidious) exploit this CDN aspect to download the videos.

It's common to see Invidious instances momentarily blocked. The blockage can't last forever for two reasons: firstly, IPs (especially IPv4) changes due to how ISPs offer IPv4 addresses through CGNAT, so the instance IPv4 (generally domestic servers) will eventually change (often to a completely different IPv4 range) and YouTube won't know that the new IP is a former "offender". Secondly, as IPv4s works through CGNAT, Google can't keep the bans forever because this IPv4 will be eventually rotated to another client from ISP that's completely unrelated and unaware of how their IPv4 was a former address for a downloader. It's like how Signal/WhatsApp/Telegram/Facebook/phone-required services can't really keep a permanent ban for a specific prepaid number (especially on countries like Brazil, where ANATEL allows for phone number rotation when the mobile plan is cancelled), because the number will be potentially owned by another person with nothing to do with the former owner.

So, in summary, Google can either end with YouTube CDNs (ditching their load balancing), or they can try to implement an innovative way to keep load balancing while serving the request one-time only, or they won't be able to do nothing but to perpetually catch themselves drying ice cubes.

[-] needanke@feddit.org 4 points 1 day ago

Maybe a stupid question, but how do paid streaming services avoid that issue?

[-] hangonasecond@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

Not the OP, and I don't actually know, but paid streaming services differ from YouTube in that everyone who accesses the content is paying for the service. On one hand, you can validate that everytime a video is served, it's served to a paying user. On the other, you are receiving revenue directly from consumers to fund the infrastructure to store and serve the videos.

YouTube, on the other hand, stores significantly more content, for free, and can be accessed for free, without being signed in.

[-] nafzib@lemmy.world 2 points 22 hours ago

The "without being signed in" part of YouTube is now no longer completely true. I tried to watch a video tutorial at work the other day and it wouldn't play because I wasn't signed in and so "they couldn't be sure I wasn't a bot". I'm not signing into any personal stuff on my work computer, or wasting time creating a "work" Google account, so I guess YT can no longer be a place where I can get helpful programming info.

[-] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 1 points 16 hours ago

That might have been because of your IT team. You can absolutely watch YouTube videos without being signed in. I do it all the time.

[-] Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world 3 points 16 hours ago

YT likely recognized the IP as belonging to a commercial entity and threw up the block, due to bot concerns, over that .

[-] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 3 points 16 hours ago

Possibly yeah

[-] x00za@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 day ago

You are spot on. The CDN simply has authentication functionality. (Or the app generates a temporary CDN URL that you'll use)

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2024
889 points (99.7% liked)

Technology

58132 readers
4049 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS