Live data from Hacker News

Yt-dlp – A YouTube-dl fork with additional features and fixes

github.com

121–130 of 352 posts

Re: Yt-dlp – A YouTube-dl fork with additional features and fixes

#121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what then do you think is a realistic alternative? YouTube costing $20/mo or more? Can’t watch videos without a patron? If your answer is nothing — I expect everything for free, then that’s both unrealistic and parasitic.

Psst. We're trying to keep YouTube from turning into cable TV. Please don't interfere.

Were you the guy I was having this exact comparison conversation with last night over bourbon and ginger ales?

I'm terrified we're already well on the other side of the Rubicon

Re: Yt-dlp – A YouTube-dl fork with additional features and fixes

#122

One of the nice features added to yt-dlp recently: It integrates with sponskrub to call into the SponsorBlock database and with the right options will strip the sponsor segments from downloaded videos. Edit: Correct typo

Man I thought I was in heaven when I accidentally stumbled upon SponsorBlock. Now you're telling me about this?! Amazing! How does the video quality fare after stripping? Is it re-encoding the video or somehow stripping it without altering the quality?

I doubt it would have to re-encode. First it would split the video into separate files which don’t include the sponsored content. Then would use something like the ffmpeg concat demuxer which will adjust timestamps of the input streams, and then output a concatenated result stream (no reencode) (https://ffmpeg.org/ffmpeg-formats.html#concat-1). So it should probably have zero quality loss.

Re: Yt-dlp – A YouTube-dl fork with additional features and fixes

#123

haven't paid attention to this since all the drama last year but again - what are all of you using youtube-dl for? Archiving your channel subs?

Mainly not having to worry about reliability of my connection to youtube. I get loading-spinners and changes in resolution fairly regularly on YT.

Re: Yt-dlp – A YouTube-dl fork with additional features and fixes

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are the sponsor parts really so bad? Yes. Some of us don't like being assaulted with sales pitches everywhere we look.

I'll add another wrinkle: I like content-creators that create for the love of doing it and not to try and turn it into a business. When I follow a YouRuber (I'm borrowing that typo, I like it) and have seen them descend into the paid/promotional arena, I have been turned off and stopped subscribing to their channel. Advertising tends to naturally weed out, for me, the ones who are not as passionate about what they do…

Preface: I am a Youtuber who prefers not to do sponsored segments but has done some in the past.

> Advertising tends to naturally weed out, for me, the ones who are not as passionate about what they do.

This is a remark I see over and over again, basically "You're only in it for the money" once you do sponsors. Here's the thing that no one really gets, Youtube is not a hobby. I don't care what the channel topic is, building cars, lathe projects, tech reviews, pets, etc. The hobby for the creator is the subject, not the video production platform or process. Youtube is not social media, we're not posting videos so our friends can see what we're up to. The entire system is built completely differently from something like facebook, twitter, instgram, etc. It requires actual work. Planning videos, making thumbnails, responding to comments from strangers, making business connections, and more when you get larger. "Making videos" themselves isn't just waving a camera around while you do something either and requires it's own thought and effort.

Anyone who has reasonable success on Youtube can be monetarily rewarded for that. That alone creates an expectation that it could possibly be a source of income from the outset. If you can achieve making it a sustainable income source capable of being lived off of, why wouldn't you? You can continue to do and build upon your actual hobby, whatever it is. But instead of working a different "conventional" job you do video production, PR, marketing, and potentially advertising. The problem is that the on platform advertisement revenue is not enough to cover the effort and resources required to make videos as you become more serious about it. Part of this is on viewers because Youtube knows if you are using adblock. I can see this on the back end, on average for my channel less than 50% of views are monetized. So if nobody used adblock I could make literally double the amount on just the on platform ads alone. But that's not how it is and it's not going to change.

So you have to do something else as well. Personally, as a Youtuber, I see two revenue paths. You either go crowd funded with something like Patreon or do sponsors. You can do both but unless it's well done and relevant it feels like double dipping to me. But the in video sponsors aren't any different than the other advertisements on platform on youtube, except they aren't blocked by adblock. (Youtubers properly disclosing the ads is a completely separate issue that should not besmirch everyone who does it.) Youtubers don't get to choose their sponsor partners unless they are gigantic and have to take what they can get. We get tons of spam offers that try to screw us, taking real ones from even slightly reputable companies can make a big impact. Youtubers should do a better job of picking them, but not everybody understands something like what a VPN actually is and how is just moves your endpoint to a different set of private hands. But advertising is tied to media and not new at all. Complaining about a slightly more effective version of it is just naivety about how the service works and what the people who make the videos do.

TL;DR: Youtube is not a hobby, the subject Youtubers talk about is. Youtube is a job that takes real work, but it can't pay well enough, partly because of adblock. In video sponsors are just a different ad method that directly pays bypassing the adblock problem.

PS: I do not use adblock, partly because it feels hypocritical to make money on ads and then block them for others. The internet is indeed annoying without it, but I manage just fine.

Re: Yt-dlp – A YouTube-dl fork with additional features and fixes

#126
I know it sounds incredibly picky, but given it's supposed to be a drop-in youtube-dl replacement, it's quite annoying to suddenly change the name to something as hard to remember as yt-dlp instead of, say, youtube-dlp. I will be mixing it up every time I'll google it, I guess. Not to mention it messes with naming scheme of bash scripts and aliases I already have.

Re: Yt-dlp – A YouTube-dl fork with additional features and fixes

#127
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are the sponsor parts really so bad? To me not only is it easy to skip, I want indie people to make enough money to produce high quality content; otherwise media is just what a few biggies want to fund. In my experience, it's the same with ads everywhere else. It (usually) starts out not being overly obnoxious, with just a "this video is sponsored by [garbage tier mobile game/earphones/vpn/whatever] more about them…

But what then do you think is a realistic alternative? YouTube costing $20/mo or more? Can’t watch videos without a patron? If your answer is nothing — I expect everything for free, then that’s both unrealistic and parasitic.

Easy: a downloader that makes it look like you've watched those stupid commercials, but you actually haven't and you're back to the original video. Let the sponsors beware.

Re: Yt-dlp – A YouTube-dl fork with additional features and fixes

#128
post #126

I know it sounds incredibly picky, but given it's supposed to be a drop-in youtube-dl replacement, it's quite annoying to suddenly change the name to something as hard to remember as yt-dlp instead of, say, youtube-dlp. I will be mixing it up every time I'll google it, I guess. Not to mention it messes with naming scheme of bash scripts and aliases I already have.

alias it?

Re: Yt-dlp – A YouTube-dl fork with additional features and fixes

#129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what then do you think is a realistic alternative? YouTube costing $20/mo or more? Can’t watch videos without a patron? If your answer is nothing — I expect everything for free, then that’s both unrealistic and parasitic.

Easy: a downloader that makes it look like you've watched those stupid commercials, but you actually haven't and you're back to the original video. Let the sponsors beware.

Until they see they get very little ROI and stop advertising that way. It's not like people sponsoring aren't looking to see what these channels do for them and just spend blindly...

Re: Yt-dlp – A YouTube-dl fork with additional features and fixes

#130
post #126

I know it sounds incredibly picky, but given it's supposed to be a drop-in youtube-dl replacement, it's quite annoying to suddenly change the name to something as hard to remember as yt-dlp instead of, say, youtube-dlp. I will be mixing it up every time I'll google it, I guess. Not to mention it messes with naming scheme of bash scripts and aliases I already have.

alias it?

I alias "youtube-dt " to "yt-". i guess a lot of people do. I won't be surprised if I already have some yt-dlp among the other variations. Also, I already said it's not hte only problem. So suddenly naming the thing itself yt-dlp is a "fuck you".
Post reply on HN