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

ReVanced

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 248 posts

Re: ReVanced

#111

Post by reedjosh »

CuriouslyC wrote: post #100
Flankk wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every time this discussion comes up on HN I get downvoted for being completely against adblock. It's crazy how far people will go to justify taking food off other people's plate. Usually the argument about tracking comes up. As if it's used for anything other than attempt to sell you products and services. Completely screw over small businesses and screw the content creators. On a venture capitalist forum. The hypocr…

It's because modern advertising's purpose isn't to tell people about a product they already wanted but didn't know existed (which would be fine), it's to cause people to feel a sense of fear/loss/inadequacy that they previously didn't and then present the product as a solution, or associate a product with something people love in a manipulative way, because those types of ads are worlds more effective at driving sale…

> modern advertising's purpose isn't to tell people about a product they already wanted but didn't know existed

Yes.

> it's to cause people to feel a sense of fear/loss/inadequacy that they previously didn't and then present the product as a solution

Maybe a bit.

But, these days I think the real reason is the corrupctive influence ad money buys. Major media platforms censor at the whim of their advertisers. Content providers also do so.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAkQlZgnbUQ

Re: ReVanced

#112

Post by laci37 »

brink wrote: post #14

I wouldn't be so resistant to paying Youtube if they weren't so trigger happy with censorship.

Same thing here. I'm happy to pay for Nebula. But I don't want to pay to a platform that is constantly criticized by all the creators publishing there.

Re: ReVanced

#113

Post by lfkdev »

Aissen wrote: post #5

Apparently Vanced was a patched YouTube app for Android, removing ads, adding a dark theme and YouTube Premium features (probably more ?). It was discontinued two weeks ago: https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/13/22975890/youtube-vanced-a...

apparently??? it was such an amazing app used by millions and by me every single day, i was devastated to hear it was discontinued

Re: ReVanced

#114

Post by judge2020 »

CuriouslyC wrote: post #97
slenk wrote: post #69

It always suprises me how unwilling the tech community is to support creators on YouTube. You're not hurting YouTube by blocking ads, you're hurting the people who get ads from their videos. Just pay for Youtube Premium - its no different than Spotify or Apple music price-wise and people shell out for that without thinking every month.

Maybe you didn't know this, but Google is stingy as fuck in terms of the portion of ad revenue they share with content creators. Most content creators just see youtube as a way to get exposure, then they turn around and monetize other ways like sponsors, patreon, product sales, etc.

Do you have an actual source? Some numbers? Because 1k views=$1 is pretty good for a clips channel[0], and YT Premium views have always payed more than ad-supported views[1,2]. It's generally not sustainable to only rely on Adsense but it's a piece of the pie that most creators couldn't make up for overnight if it disappeared.

0: https://youtu.be/aaoVlFVqYuk?t=20

1: https://www.dailydot.com/upstream/totalbiscuit-youtube-red-p...

2: https://twitter.com/LinusTech/status/1486935690315112455?s=2...

Re: ReVanced

#115

Post by Wronnay »

3np wrote: post #61
xyzal wrote: post #10

They should mirror somewhere outside of GitHub, this may get taken down.

codeberg might be a good candidate. Slightly tangentially, to facilitate mobility and cross-server collaboration and repo syncing, Gitea (which they're built on) is getting federation in place https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/18240 https://forgefriends.org/

But after Codebergs Terms of Use, "Forks, migrations and testing repos are considered as inactive when they don't contain unique contributions and are inactive for more than a month. They shouldn't be kept for a prolonged amount of time, and thus might be removed after notifying maintainers and providing a 90 days period to ask for preservation."

Also "You are legally responsible for your edits and contributions on the platform, so for your own protection you should exercise caution and avoid contributing any content that may result in criminal or civil liability under any applicable laws (e.g. copyright and patent infringements, but also things like age-restricted content without age confirmation). Both the German legislation and the legislation in your country of residence may be relevant here."

Codeberg is a registered organization and also has to act on copyright infringements...

Re: ReVanced

#116

Post by Psychotherapist »

gundamdoubleO wrote: post #6

Is this somehow based on the original Vanced app (which wasn't open source afaik?) or are they essentially beginning from scratch?

The Re in ReVanced is for "Reverse Engineered" Vanced. ReVanced is going to be identical to the original Vanced, but later on (especially since it's open source) more patches/"plugins" will be available.

Re: ReVanced

#117

Post by ATsch »

izacus wrote: post #62
ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

New pipe will do that too. Or just watching the video in the phone browser.

Or you know, paying a few bucks for the music via Premium subscription.

I pay for youtube premium and still use Vanced for all of it's advanced features, but background playback is useful for far more than music.

Re: ReVanced

#118

Post by moondev »

mach1ne wrote: post #2

At least they didn't make the copyright mistakes this time. Perhaps it would be better if this version of Vanced stayed difficult to install to avoid spreading it too wide.

> Not affiliated with Vanced team.

I wonder if the original "vanced" can now file a dispute over this project's name?

Re: ReVanced

#119

Post by raelmebrand »

Flankk wrote: post #95
slenk wrote: post #69

It always suprises me how unwilling the tech community is to support creators on YouTube. You're not hurting YouTube by blocking ads, you're hurting the people who get ads from their videos. Just pay for Youtube Premium - its no different than Spotify or Apple music price-wise and people shell out for that without thinking every month.

Every time this discussion comes up on HN I get downvoted for being completely against adblock. It's crazy how far people will go to justify taking food off other people's plate. Usually the argument about tracking comes up. As if it's used for anything other than attempt to sell you products and services. Completely screw over small businesses and screw the content creators. On a venture capitalist forum. The hypocr…

I am genuinely concerned that you feel bad. But do you know how much money poor people pay to watch ads + all the scam ads they get (and unfortunately lose money). Seriously, test it. (I used to live in 3rd world and now use adblock)...

> Completely screw over small businesses and screw the content creators. On a venture capitalist forum

Then please try to screw VCs (not innocent people in developing world that want to see something for 1GB data per month and they lose so much money for ads). Sure please bill the VCs.

Yes, the hypocrisy is unreal.

Post reply on HN