Want I really want is an *arr style app that I can give a list of Youtube channels I want archived, and it would just keep the archive up to date indefinitely.
What's an *arr style app?
The best YouTube downloaders, and how Google silenced the press
71–80 of 251 posts
Re: The best YouTube downloaders, and how Google silenced the press
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, you can capture HDMI stream with a cheap card so basically everything is ultimately copyable, however that brings in some friction. Some people prefer the easiest option, even if that showers them in advertisments and distupts their attention.
Not if you want the highest quality, and they could absolutely stop even that if desired. The only reason why those methods work is due to legacy support. If they only supported the latest versions of HDMI and DRM, it would be very hard to get decent quality video/audio. As it is, even with things currently as they are, we still don't have the high quality feeds that are sent to TVs and dedicated hardware.
I wonder if it would be possible to use e.g. an FPGA to intercept the "last-leg" MIPI signals going between a TV/monitor's control board and the physical display panel itself. Surely there can't be any DRM at that level, because there is not much more "compute" down the line?
Granted, you would have to deal with whatever your display does to the raw video signal - preferable to pointing a camcorder at the display but a little worse than the original file.
Re: The best YouTube downloaders, and how Google silenced the press
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That doesn't mean the DRM works. You can find torrents of all those shows. Causation does not mean correlation. The vast majority of content available via torrents did not come from breaking a streamer's DRM.
It didn't? Then how are they getting the streamed bits directly? Since there's generally a torrent available that is the direct source, no re-encoding. Or do you mean they read the source from hacking into a memory buffer after the player does decryption but before decoding, instead of doing the decryption themselves?
I’m saying they are getting the original from different sources than a streaming platform
Re: The best YouTube downloaders, and how Google silenced the press
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm pretty sure they meant, can the videos be accessed as files in the filesystem, which to my knowledge they cannot.
[flagged]
Shit? Illegal? It's literally your right on videos like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSEJApMIrLU>. Expand the description and see at the bottom: license is set to creative commons. The copyright holder permits everyone to remix the video but youtube still does not show a button for you to actually make use of that
You need to breach the terms of service (use a downloader) to exercise the rights of the content license that youtube supports
Re: The best YouTube downloaders, and how Google silenced the press
#75> many organizations would abandon hosting their videos on YouTube for a platform that offered more user flexibility
Well it's about tie organizations also upload their videos to peertube!
Re: The best YouTube downloaders, and how Google silenced the press
#76Is Stacher open source? Last time I searched 'stacher open source' on Google, I found a Reddit thread discussing when it might become open source. EDIT: The reason I ask is that the article says Stacher is open source, and that is news to me.
Same here. Couldn't find any source code
Re: The best YouTube downloaders, and how Google silenced the press
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
I didn't say anything about breaking the DRM. I suggested there's no reason to.
AFAIK HDMI protects from direct ripping so how do they actually do it?
Eh sort of sometimes maybe. Lots of hardware/cables out there that don’t care what you’re doing. I can use an ATEM mini to grab basically anything I want so long as I’m down to capture in real time.
Re: The best YouTube downloaders, and how Google silenced the press
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
It didn't? Then how are they getting the streamed bits directly? Since there's generally a torrent available that is the direct source, no re-encoding. Or do you mean they read the source from hacking into a memory buffer after the player does decryption but before decoding, instead of doing the decryption themselves?
I’m saying they are getting the original from different sources than a streaming platform
I don't see how that would work with videos that don't have differeny original sources. For example, Netflix-original shows/movies. While a small fraction are released on DVD/Blu-ray, the vast majority are only accessible through Netflix, nowhere else.
Re: The best YouTube downloaders, and how Google silenced the press
#79The claim that Google secretly wants YouTube downloaders to work doesn't hold up. Their focus is on delivering videos across a vast range of devices without breaking playback(and even that is blurring[0]), not enabling downloads. If you dive into the yt-dlp source code, you see the insane complexity of calculations needed to download a video. There is code to handle nsig checks, internal YouTube API quirks, and const…
The argument the article is making is that if they really wanted YouTube downloaders to stop working, they'd switch to Encrypted Media Extensions. Do you think that's not plausible?
Using DRM would make it illegal for YouTubers to use Creative-Commons-licensed content in their videos, such as Kevin MacLeod's music or many images from Wikipedia.
Re: The best YouTube downloaders, and how Google silenced the press
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why 4k shows are still quite rare on torrents?
Hard to speak for everyone but I'd not be interested in them because it's a lot of storage space and my device can display only "1k" (1080p) anyway
1080p is 2K. The value of the "K" coefficient is determined by the x axis, not the y axis. That's why 4K is 3840x2160.
16K = 15360x8640 8K = 7680x4320 4K = 3840x2160 2K = 1920x1080 1K = 960x540
(Every value is a doubling of the tier below it, or in the case of "1K" a halving.)