151–160 of 614 posts
The app is great, but wasn't google recently banning user accounts for it? Youtube account and google account is same thing, so this app is useful only for othwerwise ungoogled users
Besides, does Google/YT even specify the reason for bans? Don't they just write something vague?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most likely. I understand the appeal of these types of applications but it really just comes off as entitled IMO. Just watch the ads to support the content creators you care about - it isn’t that hard. I imagine this will be an unpopular opinion here though.
It's certainly not a popular opinion, but it's definitely an uninformed opinion. The aim of NewPipe is not to "stick it to the man" or even to advertisers, it's to create a superior viewing experience that removes much of the bloat of Youtube's official app, and also being light on system resources. Whereas the official app used to crash and warm up my Moto G5 Plus, NewPipe has been running like a dream for years.
But they're not - they're like one of those re-released Android Play Store apps which are hacked to provide paid features for free.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not piracy. Youtube is sending you packets, out of their own choice. It's my own right to save those packets(without re-distributing) them and watch them in any form I like. Playing in the background is not a "feature", it's a basic device capability, the fact that YouTube went out of their way to prevent it does not make it right, imagine if the browser client had stopped playing when you went out of focus -…
No, that's not how any of this works. Google has terms of use on their service. You are violating those terms of service. This is completely cut and dry.
[1]: https://github.com/TeamNewPipe/NewPipe/issues/105 [2]: https://github.com/TeamNewPipe/NewPipe/issues/668
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Um. Consider the Official YouTube app, with a paid YouTube Premium subscription. >(and you can choose whether to download them as audio files) Videos with still images (many songs) shouldn't be much data at all over the audio alone.
>Um. Nit: Not sure what this is supposed to mean. Is this an attempt to mimic how you speak aloud? >Consider the Official YouTube app, with a paid YouTube Premium subscription. That is definitely an option, but people who use things like youtube-dl or apps like NewPipe probably aren't in the target audience for YouTube Premium. >Videos with still images (many songs) shouldn't be much data at all over the audio alone.…
It's to add condescension.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It is also to the benefit if creators if they diversify their revenue streams. Watching content on YouTube while blocking ads does not encourage creators to go to other platforms. You've already consumed their product, thus lessening demand, so there's less reason to put it on another platform. It's not likely you'll go watch it on Vimeo after they upload it there when you've already seen it on YouTube. Creators ma…
> Describing your actions as "benefitting" them by helping them see this by depriving them of revenue from you for their content is a slightly odd take though. The claim was that creators would benefit from diversifying, not that my actions were benefiting them. I was quite clear that my motivations were related to Google.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder why this is being downvoted - Google asks for subscription for features that this app hacks for free. In any other context this would be deemed unethical (or even piracy). E.g. think of an application that streams Apple Music without paying Apple or distributors of cracked apps with enabled in-app purchase features. And yet the HN community happily endorses such apps when it comes to Google. I also wonder wh…
That's not piracy. Youtube is sending you packets, out of their own choice. It's my own right to save those packets(without re-distributing) them and watch them in any form I like. Playing in the background is not a "feature", it's a basic device capability, the fact that YouTube went out of their way to prevent it does not make it right, imagine if the browser client had stopped playing when you went out of focus -…
So bypassing the wishes of copyright holder / creator and getting the content for free is pretty much textbook definition of piracy.
Now, we can debate whether piracy is ethical in some cases (and I think it is in many cases, especially due to how cancerous the copyright lobby is these days). But let's not pretend that having a service provider say "hey, pay us 10$ a month for this feature" and then making an app that gives that paid feature for free is some kind of right.
Youtube might be the only place I actually don't mind ads. Some creators on youtube are extremely good at providing valuable content in short form - I use it primarily as a learning platform, whether I am doing wood work, learning how to fix something at home, or learning about a new topic. I would rather continue to support these creators by watching ads on their own channel than paying for a subscription that cover…
Most of these creators accept actual money
If you'd ever work on anything close to video streaming industry you'd find out that the costs of delivering video to the world is massive. And paying for those services is how you make them sustainable (and add competition).
The app is great, but wasn't google recently banning user accounts for it? Youtube account and google account is same thing, so this app is useful only for othwerwise ungoogled users
please donate : https://newpipe.schabi.org/donate/