The best YouTube downloaders, and how Google silenced the press

Post by Waraqa » Sat, Sep 20, 2025, 7:15 AM UTC

geokon wrote: post #124

molticrystal wrote: post #23

The 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…

I never understood why do they not limit downloading data to the speed at which you could be possibly watching it. Yesterday I downloaded a 15hour show in like 20 minutes. There is no way I could have downloaded that much data in a legit way through their website/player Im glad I wasn't blocked or throttled, but it seems like it'd be trivial to block someone like me Am I missing something? It does sort of feel like t…

Post by SilverElfin » Sat, Sep 20, 2025, 7:18 AM UTC

iamflimflam1 wrote: post #131

SilverElfin wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why don’t creators both publish to YouTube but also publish somewhere else for archival or public access reasons, to help keep content available for outside walled gardens? Is it just not important to them? Is it hosting costs? Missing out on ad revenue?

Where else should they be publishing to? And who is going to pay for this service? Don’t forget - most “content creators” are not technical - self hosting is not an option. And even if it were - it costs money.

Post by drnick1 » Sat, Sep 20, 2025, 7:24 AM UTC

imiric wrote: post #112

guerrilla wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 constant obfuscation that makes it a nightmare(and the maintainers heroes) to keep up. Google frequently rejects download attempts, blocks certain devices or access methods, and breaks techniques that yt-dlp relies on. This just made…

As the web devolves further, the only viable long-term solution will be allow lists instead of block lists. There is too much hostility online—from websites that want to track you and monetize your data and attention, SEO scams and generated content, and an ever-increasing army of bots—that it's becoming infeasible to maintain rules to filter all of it out. It's much easier to write rules for traffic you approve of,…

Post by Barbing » Sat, Sep 20, 2025, 7:36 AM UTC

molticrystal wrote: post #89

eek2121 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I do agree (mostly, I've never had a download NOT work, on the rare occasion I grab one), they haven't made it impossible to download videos, so that is a win IMO.

Your view from a distance, where you rarely download Youtube videos, is common for now, and we still live in a very fortunate time. The problems are short lived, so over long periods, they tend to average out, and you are unlikely to notice them. Even active users will rarely notice a problem, so it is understandable for your use case, it would seem perfect. Looking closely, at least for yt-dlp, you would see it trie…

Post by renegat0x0 » Sat, Sep 20, 2025, 7:44 AM UTC

phoronixrly wrote: post #130

js8 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have YT Premium and if Google bans yt-dlp, I will cancel my subscription. I pay them not to do that.

Seems quite naive to think they'd be affected in any way by the tiny intersection of users that are both yt-dlp users and premium subscribers boycotting them...