Is it not the right time to decentralise those type of services? I think it is. Isn't this site owned by Microsoft? So if it is, this is normal big corporation behaviour. They embrace open-source community to gain advantage. Is there a way to host code without being dependent on big corporation? I am really interested in the answer of this question. Public programming code must be treated like public utility. For example like water, it must be ensured that water is drinkable and properly managed, but in public domain. Is anyone remember Nestle attempt to privatise water? (https://www.insidehook.com/daily_brief/news-opinion/nestle-b...).
GitHub Warns Users Reposting YouTube-DL They Could Be Banned
81–90 of 273 posts
Re: GitHub Warns Users Reposting YouTube-DL They Could Be Banned
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s why it works. If it had significant impact to worth their compensation the lawyers would have been on it.
No, js is fundamentally a technology with an anti-competitive ethos enforced by the fact you need an army of engineers employed full time to keep even a trivial site up and running, and on top of that it has surveillance built into it's core. You can't be anonymous using it by design. Apps built on top of tcp that don't have persistent state, like signed emails, don't suffer from either of those problems and are fund…
See, anything about sharing needs centralisation. It's not about JS or whatever language or framework or whatever makes this thing tik.
The need for centralisation is an inherit weakness that can't be solved by technology. Sure you can share something among friends, then your centralisation point would be your school or workplace or something too touch heavy to attack and scale, so no one cares.
Re: GitHub Warns Users Reposting YouTube-DL They Could Be Banned
#83Is it not the right time to decentralise those type of services? I think it is. Isn't this site owned by Microsoft? So if it is, this is normal big corporation behaviour. They embrace open-source community to gain advantage. Is there a way to host code without being dependent on big corporation? I am really interested in the answer of this question. Public programming code must be treated like public utility. For exa…
Github is not the only player, and there are plenty of other options. Git itself is decentralized, so that's half the issue solved. Gitlab, Gerrit, and a bevvy of other web front ends for git exist, some open source, some closed.
Github is still the biggest, but Gitlab is probably a close second.
Re: GitHub Warns Users Reposting YouTube-DL They Could Be Banned
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
decentralization doesn’t work without a centralized tool. Torrents are nothing more than a clever idea without The Pirate Bay & similar, Bitcoin is worth nothing without the exchanges.
> Torrents are nothing more than a clever idea without The Pirate Bay No, there are magnets now. You can send a torrent as a hash. The reason it won't work is because you can just take that hash, log all of the swarm ips, send secret letters to all of the isps to reveal the seeders and leechers, bust in their doors and arrest them, publicize their arrests in every newspaper and on every television channel, interrogat…
Has anything like that ever happened?
Re: GitHub Warns Users Reposting YouTube-DL They Could Be Banned
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
You could always use a newsgroup for patches/issues/discussion. Those are notoriously hard to sensor and usually can be posted to/read by normal mail clients.
The cynical might note that somehow software development happened before modern version control systems, much less GitHub, even existed.
Not as public open source in such a wide scale and availability as today
Re: GitHub Warns Users Reposting YouTube-DL They Could Be Banned
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
>youtube-dl does not circumvent any protection measures It does.
Where? Can you show me the code?
YouTube uses encrypted signatures as a way of hiding the URL of the video.
https://github.com/l1ving/youtube-dl/blob/master/youtube_dl/...
Re: GitHub Warns Users Reposting YouTube-DL They Could Be Banned
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gitlab is apparently a US based company. Unlikely that they would be more courages than Github.
Yes, but having a complete copy of all my projects in a matching self-hosted environment mitigates a huge amount of risk because it would still be there if I got banned from GitLab.com. I could still use the workflow and tooling I'm used to. Contrast that with GitHub where losing your account means losing the workflow and tooling you depend on. I'm not talking about trying to re-host a controversial project though. I…
My statement didn't imply you should use Github, but that there is no reason to feel more save with Gitlab.
Re: GitHub Warns Users Reposting YouTube-DL They Could Be Banned
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where? Can you show me the code?
YouTube uses encrypted signatures as a way of hiding the URL of the video. https://github.com/l1ving/youtube-dl/blob/master/youtube_dl/...
That downloads and runs a web page, the same as your browser does when it visits youtube.com.
Re: GitHub Warns Users Reposting YouTube-DL They Could Be Banned
#89People should move their youbube-dl repositories to servers hosted in Switzerland, where people are not criminalized when downloading content and making copies for personal use (even when copy protected).
Is there a major git host located in Switzerland? I guess one could rent a VPS there if not.
Nothing like the Github or Gitlab services I know of, but there are a couple of hosters where you can rent a (virtual) server.
Re: GitHub Warns Users Reposting YouTube-DL They Could Be Banned
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where? Can you show me the code?
YouTube uses encrypted signatures as a way of hiding the URL of the video. https://github.com/l1ving/youtube-dl/blob/master/youtube_dl/...
Hey, what's that?
https://github.com/l1ving/youtube-dl/blob/master/youtube_dl/...
So if you open devtools in your web browser and go to the Network tab, where you can manually download all audio and video files -- congratulations, your browser just circumvented protection measures, because it interpreted some javascript. I guess we have to take down browsers too now. This is completely retarded.