Live data from Hacker News

YouTube Tells Open-Source Privacy Software ‘Invidious’ to Shut Down

vice.com

41–50 of 50 posts

Re: YouTube Tells Open-Source Privacy Software ‘Invidious’ to Shut Down

#41
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brave! It’s privacy first chrome. Arc is also advertised as such, but isn’t open source so you have you take their word for it or reverse engineer it.

Brave isn't an alternative in my eyes. That's supporting the chromium monopoly. I mean real alternatives.

[flagged]

Re: YouTube Tells Open-Source Privacy Software ‘Invidious’ to Shut Down

#42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tools like this exist, but by using them you run the risk of having your IP flagged by anti-fraud tools and potentially blacklisted. Not because those tools have an issue with the specific tools involved, but because that kind of behavior makes it look like you're running a click farm. It could also have negative repercussions for the sites whose ads you're "clicking" on, but whether that's a pro or a con depends on…

Isn't this actually good? If advertisers and other malicious actors preemptively block me for "fraud" it would be very much welcome.

The problem is those blocklists sometimes get shared with other companies doing more broad bot management stuff, which could end up getting you blocked (or soft blocked) from other forms of content.

Trying to log in to your streaming platform of choice? Have fun solving three extra CAPTCHAs because your IP has a history of "bot" activity. etc etc etc

Re: YouTube Tells Open-Source Privacy Software ‘Invidious’ to Shut Down

#43
post #2

YouTube legal team contacted Invidious developers - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36250582 (8 days ago, 22 comments)

Thanks, I'd missed that one.

Technically my submission was a dupe, though there still seems to have been substantive discussion.

Re: YouTube Tells Open-Source Privacy Software ‘Invidious’ to Shut Down

#44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox’s main source of revenue is Google paying them to be the default search provider. They essentially exist at Google’s whim.

They can probably do just fine with another provider and less money if google gives up, so power dynamic isn't all what you say.

Regardless of who the patron is, that's still a patronage operation, rather than a freestanding commercial enterprise.

(I'm not defending market-based approaches, nor do I think they're well-suited to all domains, and most especially not information services. But I am pointing out the relationship of Mozilla to its Daddy Moneybags. I sincerely hope better alternatives will be found.)

Re: YouTube Tells Open-Source Privacy Software ‘Invidious’ to Shut Down

#45
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are the privacy implications if you switch the search to use duck duck go or something else in Chrome? I kind of naively thought that would give you privacy but I need more information.

Im no Google shill, but the results DDG returns are terrible. I suspect for search to work well, the engine needs to know a bit about the user - especially if localising the results is important to you.

I've been fine with duck duck go, I occasionally go to google if i can't find something.

Re: YouTube Tells Open-Source Privacy Software ‘Invidious’ to Shut Down

#46
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are the privacy implications if you switch the search to use duck duck go or something else in Chrome? I kind of naively thought that would give you privacy but I need more information.

DuckDuckGo may not be tracking you on their website, but Chrome is tracking you all the time. A majority of companies partnered with Google to get data on what sites you visit, and what data Google can share about you. Not just that, Chrome also doesn't respect your privacy settings across some websites especially owned by Google: https://www.searchenginejournal.com/google-to-face-5b-lawsui... They also are going to…

The details about that lawsuit in the link do not seem like google is subverting anon mode to me. They just use usual cookie tracking, so they can track you if you are logged in to some site that uses google analytics (ie analytics isn't turned off, but when you start anon mode you have a clean slate and all is deleted at the end).

I was more worried about was google adding a hidden tracking cookie when I delete all my cookies somehow identifying me. Or was the browser sending all my traffic to google directly somehow.

Re: YouTube Tells Open-Source Privacy Software ‘Invidious’ to Shut Down

#47
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are the privacy implications if you switch the search to use duck duck go or something else in Chrome? I kind of naively thought that would give you privacy but I need more information.

Im no Google shill, but the results DDG returns are terrible. I suspect for search to work well, the engine needs to know a bit about the user - especially if localising the results is important to you.

Using a search engine efficiently is a lost skill these days and has been replaced by search engines knowing more bout you and making assumptions about your search intentions.

Re: YouTube Tells Open-Source Privacy Software ‘Invidious’ to Shut Down

#48
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And avoid Electron based apps as much as possible. It is Chrome anyway.

Use Tauri as an Electron alternative.

OS API for Web views and systems configured browsers are the only alternatives.

Re: YouTube Tells Open-Source Privacy Software ‘Invidious’ to Shut Down

#49
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome on Android does not support extensions at all. It's still the biggest mobile browser. Sure, it will make a lot of technical people mad, but a lot more won't care.

Brave and Firefox on Android blocks ads just fine.

Great but they barely have market share. People apparently don't care enough about blocking ads.

Re: YouTube Tells Open-Source Privacy Software ‘Invidious’ to Shut Down

#50
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Im no Google shill, but the results DDG returns are terrible. I suspect for search to work well, the engine needs to know a bit about the user - especially if localising the results is important to you.

Using a search engine efficiently is a lost skill these days and has been replaced by search engines knowing more bout you and making assumptions about your search intentions.

Given that half of users report search modifiers have ceased working entirely with Google, and many other engines don't handle them well if at all, the skill isn't lost so much as impossible to apply.
Post reply on HN