Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Vanced has been discontinued

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 422 posts

Re: Vanced has been discontinued

#331

Post by thirdsun »

CountHackulus wrote: post #99
nightfly wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What problems do you have with the official app? I normally have large list of complaints about video streaming services, and I don't have a single issue with the Android Youtube app

My big issue is the backgrounding. I like watching a video while cooking, but I also need to use timers. Not having the video stop and re-orient itself to portrait while I quickly set or dismiss a timer is excellent. I also find the UI during live streams to be borderline unusable on mobile.

> My big issue is the backgrounding. I like watching a video while cooking, but I also need to use timers. Not having the video stop and re-orient itself to portrait while I quickly set or dismiss a timer is excellent.

Background playback is a paid feature. You may disagree with that decision but the option is there if you wanted it.

Re: Vanced has been discontinued

#332

Post by Semaphor »

rvbissell wrote: post #184
0des wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a nitpick, the word it's does not imply possession, you are looking for 'its'. If you cannot substitute your usage of it's with 'it is' then it is the wrong one to use.

As a native speaker I am well aware of that, but my typing muscle-memory is to some degree phonetic and on autopilot. So I sometimes reread what I wrote and discover I used e.g. 'two' instead of 'too'. It's/its is another common one.

> e.g. 'two' instead of 'too'

Oh wow. So, is this a common thing? When I type without thinking about it too much, and with my typing not being able to keep up with my brain, I tend to make those errors a lot. But I thought it was just me being dumb and not some general thing that happens to people.

Re: Vanced has been discontinued

#333

Post by benhurmarcel »

indigodaddy wrote: post #75

I pay for YTM, so haven’t ever tried any of these Adblocking things for YT. I think $10/mo is pretty decent for a music service and also the removal of all ads from YT (which includes their fairly decent library of free movies that would be ad-supported without YTM/YTP)

It's $12/month, not $10.

Re: Vanced has been discontinued

#334

Post by thirdsun »

unixhero wrote: post #276
nightfly wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What problems do you have with the official app? I normally have large list of complaints about video streaming services, and I don't have a single issue with the Android Youtube app

Ads No background play Mainly

Those are paid features. You may disagree with the pricing but I'm not sure if those are valid complaints when you're actual issue seems to be that you don't want to pay for these features (which is, of course, legitimate).

Re: Vanced has been discontinued

#335

Post by mcherm »

metadat wrote: post #58
0des wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a nitpick, the word it's does not imply possession, you are looking for 'its'. If you cannot substitute your usage of it's with 'it is' then it is the wrong one to use.

Thanks, I always get confused about this and believe it or not, I almost majored in English! Even trying to query Google for the correct rules for it's/its doesn't turn up clear, concise information as you've achieved here in two sentences. Tragically, it's another case of SEO'd to death .

Here is the simple rule I use: in English, pronouns never use an apostrophe for the possessive.

He --> his

She --> her

They --> their

We --> our

I --> my

You --> your

It --> its

(Since someone will probably point this out, this is only true of the common pronouns. There are unusual pronouns that have apostrophes in their plurals. Eg: one --> one's. But nevertheless, the rule worked for me.)

Re: Vanced has been discontinued

#336

Post by matyasrichter »

samgtx wrote: post #110
dang wrote: post #52

Recent and related: Vanced: YouTube adblocker for Android - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30444648 - Feb 2022 (346 comments)

I knew that post was a mistake as soon as I saw it.

It's not like Vanced got taken down because of a HN post...

Re: Vanced has been discontinued

#337

Post by MomoXenosaga »

galangalalgol wrote: post #146
stavros wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, they only deserve to be sued in your ethical system. To me, adding features that I can't even get if I pay isn't unethical, it's commendable.

Having come to adulthood in the 90s we all agreed that intellectual property was an oxymoron. It strikes me as odd people worry about the business model of mega corporations. Is it a sense of fairness? I have that instinct, but it doesn't apply to the likes of faang entities.

I read too many history books as a child. You learn that stealing is for lack of a better word "good".

Re: Vanced has been discontinued

#338

Post by chockchocschoir »

langsoul-com wrote: post #255
margalabargala wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be under the impression that permissively licensed software is unable to be sold, nor developers financially compensated. This is not the case. There are plenty of successful software companies whose offerings are not proprietary, yet manage to pay their developers well. Example products: - MongoDB - Red Hat - Docker - Elastic Search - Vagrant

Mongodb, Docker and elastic search are not good examples. Their software was ripped and resold by a billion dollar corps and they could do nothing about it.

> Their software was ripped and resold by a billion dollar corps and they could do nothing about it.

Yet, they still are able to employ people and give them a fair wage, making them good examples.

Re: Vanced has been discontinued

#339

Post by dspillett »

Underphil wrote: post #243
dspillett wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I draw the line before sponserblock. At that point you are taking money directly from the content creators, not YT or other platforms. I held out on blocking ads for some time, until it became impractical to avoid drive-by attacks other ways and the amount of stalking involved got _really_ creepy. If sponsor segments irritate me enough that I'd consider sponsorblock then I choose between paying for the content direct…

How is that taking money from the creators? They still get paid, and I don't have to watch a presentation about some garbage I'll never buy.

> How is that taking money from the creators?

Long term if no one buys the sponsorships will fall off.

> I'll never buy

Of course if you know with absolutely 100% certainty that you'll never buy or mention to others (you might not need/want a WidgitotronAsAService, but maybe someone you know asks about them later) anything ever mentioned in a sponsor spot, then no there is no loss (and I envy your clairvoyance).

I consider it a politeness to the content creators to not automatically skip the sponsor slots. I do manually ship the ones I've heard a few times already, but you never know if the next one might have some relevance. Unlike stalky ads, the sponsor slots have some chance of being relevant to what I'm thinking about while watching that particular clip.

Re: Vanced has been discontinued

#340

Post by nrabulinski »

coconut08 wrote: post #248
stavros wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, they only deserve to be sued in your ethical system. To me, adding features that I can't even get if I pay isn't unethical, it's commendable.

replace youtube app with photoshop and you quickly realize that obviously it is illegal to modify and distribute. just because it is free to use doesn't mean intellectual property laws and licenses don't apply to it. you can argue that you think that intellectual property laws are stupid, but it doesn't make it any less illegal.

Obligatory “pirating Adobe software is always morally right”
Post reply on HN