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

The best YouTube downloaders, and how Google silenced the press

windowsread.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 251 posts

Re: The best YouTube downloaders, and how Google silenced the press

#201

Post by fao_ »

rahimnathwani wrote: post #25

Is 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.

For Android I use Seal (https://f-droid.org/packages/com.junkfood.seal/ and https://github.com/JunkFood02/Seal), which is absolutely wonderful and has just the right amount of resolution of the options-space.

For Linux... youtube-dl I guess, because there's still no really nice alternative to it. It doesn't seem like Stacher supports non-debian systems, or non-gnu libc systems, either.

Re: The best YouTube downloaders, and how Google silenced the press

#202

Post by snowwrestler »

lucb1e wrote: post #67
AceJohnny2 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also don't buy this argument about YouTube depending on downloaders: > They perform a valuable role: If it were impossible to download YouTube videos, many organizations would abandon hosting their videos on YouTube for a platform that offered more user flexibility. Or they’d need to host a separate download link and put it in their YouTube descriptions. But organizations don’t need to jump through hoops -- they ju…

> and the organization does not have the resources to setup an alternative. Can confirm at least one tech news website argued this point and tore down their own video hosting servers in favor of using Youtube links/embeds. Old videos on tweakers.net are simply not accessible anymore, that content is gone now This was well after HTML5 was widely supported. As a website owner myself, I don't understand what's so hard n…

It’s easy to set up a backend video hosting system. But unless you are running (and checking!) a strong client-side observability system, you’ll never see all the problems that people are having with it. And they won’t tell you either, they’ll just leave.

Reddit struggles to provide a video player that is up to YouTube’s par. Do you have more resources than Reddit? Better programmers?

Re: The best YouTube downloaders, and how Google silenced the press

#203

Post by majormajor »

js8 wrote: post #196
phoronixrly wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

If every user of yt-dlp did as I do, then it would have exactly the effect that it needs to have. If yt-dlp is used by a small minority of users, why would Google be antagonistic to it? And if it's used by sizeable portion of users, then they would care.

> If yt-dlp is used by a small minority of users, why would Google be antagonistic to it?

The concern is likely that if they let it become too easy the small minority becomes a large majority and the ad business becomes unsustainable.

Consider the ease and adoption of newsgroups in the early 90s vs Napster/Limewire later and the effect that had on revenues.

Re: The best YouTube downloaders, and how Google silenced the press

#204

Post by merryocha »

roer wrote: post #125

For the android spot I'd like to recommend Seal: https://f-droid.org/packages/com.junkfood.seal/ It's "just" a yt-dlp frontend with a nice UI, meaning it works with sites other than youtube as well. It also adds a quick-download option to the android sharing menu when sharing a link, which I've found incredibly convenient.

This is what I use and it works great. I mainly use it to download things like 3-hour music playlists ahead of long drives to avoid wasting mobile bandwidth.

Re: The best YouTube downloaders, and how Google silenced the press

#206

Post by BrtByte »

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…

But I think the article's point isn't that Google wants downloaders to work, it's that they tolerate just enough friction to keep power users from revolting, without officially endorsing anything

Re: The best YouTube downloaders, and how Google silenced the press

#207

Post by BrtByte »

SilverElfin wrote: post #126
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…

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?

For a lot of creators, YouTube is the internet

Re: The best YouTube downloaders, and how Google silenced the press

#208

Post by BrtByte »

peteforde wrote: post #86

One of the things that drives me crazy about YouTube is that if a video gets taken down, it shows up as a "This video is no longer available" with no further metadata. I am far, far more uptight about no knowing which video was removed than I am about the fact that it is no longer available. I have put serious thought into creating a tool that would automatically yt-dlp every video I open to a giant hard drive and ap…

The lack of even basic metadata when a video disappears is maddening... like a black hole where context used to be

Re: The best YouTube downloaders, and how Google silenced the press

#209

Post by BrtByte »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #22

> Google needs YouTube downloaders. They perform a valuable role: If it were impossible to download YouTube videos, many organizations would abandon hosting their videos on YouTube for a platform that offered more user flexibility. Or they’d need to host a separate download link and put it in their YouTube descriptions. But organizations don’t need to jump through hoops -- they just let people use YouTube downloaders…

But I think the point is more about passive tolerance than active support

Re: The best YouTube downloaders, and how Google silenced the press

#210

Post by lofaszvanitt »

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…

Or they want to show the advertisers they do EVERYTHING.... while in reality they don't. Not that their ad system isn't total braindead.
Post reply on HN