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

Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 635 posts

Re: Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads

#171

Post by ronsor »

bArray wrote: post #129

Ronsor [1] and reply by seproDev: > Why can't we embed a lightweight interpreter such as QuickJS? > @Ronsor #14404 (comment) The linked comment [2]: > @dirkf This solution was tested with QuickJS which yielded execution times of >20 minutes per video How on earth can it be that terrible compared to Deno? [1] https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/issues/14404#issuecomment-3... [2] https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/issues/14…

It's horrifying and Google must've worked very hard to kill the performance in other interpreters.

Re: Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads

#172

Post by btown »

jasode wrote: post #99
ACCount37 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you ever wondered why the likes of Google and Cloudflare want to restrict the web to a few signed, integrity-checked browser implementations? Now you know.

>If you ever wondered why the likes of Google and Cloudflare want to restrict the web I disagree with the framing of "us vs them". It's actually "us vs us". It's not just us plebians vs FAANG giants. The small-time independent publishers and creators also want to restrict the web because they don't want their content "stolen". They want to interact with real humans instead of bots. The following are manifestations of…

But this, too, skips over some nuance. There are a few types of actors here:

- small content creators who want to make their content accessible to individuals

- companies that want to gobble up public data and resell it in a way that destroys revenue streams for content creators

- gatekeepers like Cloudflare who want to ostensibly stop this but will also become rent-extractors in the process

- users who should have the right to use personal tools like yt-dlp to customize their viewing experience, and do not wish to profit at the expense of the creators

We should be cautious both that the gatekeepers stand to profit from their gatekeeping, and that their work inhibits users as well.

If creators feel this type of user (often a dedicated fan and would-be promoter) is a necessary sacrifice to defend against predatory data extractors… then that’s absolutely the creator’s choice, but you can’t say there’s a unified “us” here.

Re: Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads

#173

Post by ynx »

jlokier wrote: post #157
bArray wrote: post #129

Ronsor [1] and reply by seproDev: > Why can't we embed a lightweight interpreter such as QuickJS? > @Ronsor #14404 (comment) The linked comment [2]: > @dirkf This solution was tested with QuickJS which yielded execution times of >20 minutes per video How on earth can it be that terrible compared to Deno? [1] https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/issues/14404#issuecomment-3... [2] https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/issues/14…

> How on earth can it be that terrible [>20 minutes] compared to Deno? QuickJS uses a bytecode interpreter (like Python, famously slow), and is optimised for simplicity and correctness. Whereas Deno uses a JIT compiler (like Java, .NET and WASM). Deno uses the same JIT compiler as Chrome, one of the most heavily-optimised in the world. That doesn't normally lead to such a large factor in time difference, but it expla…

JIT is still banned by policy on a LOT of mobile devices, meaning that previous usage of yt-dlp on mobile is now effectively unsupportable.

Re: Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads

#174

Post by baxuz »

codedokode wrote: post #150
baxuz wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then they should allow a download API for paying customers.

Music labels publish the music on YT in exchange for ad revenue, they won't be happy if someone would download their music for free, and making music is expensive, google how much just a single drum mic costs and you need lot of them.

> for paying customers

Re: Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads

#175

Post by bitwize »

jasode wrote: post #99
ACCount37 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you ever wondered why the likes of Google and Cloudflare want to restrict the web to a few signed, integrity-checked browser implementations? Now you know.

>If you ever wondered why the likes of Google and Cloudflare want to restrict the web I disagree with the framing of "us vs them". It's actually "us vs us". It's not just us plebians vs FAANG giants. The small-time independent publishers and creators also want to restrict the web because they don't want their content "stolen". They want to interact with real humans instead of bots. The following are manifestations of…

Duh. I've known this for decades. The biggest advocates for DRM I've known are small-time content creators: authors, video producers, musicians. They've been saying the same thing since the 90s: without things like DRM, their stuff would be pirated, and they'd like to earn a living doing what they love instead of grinding at a day job to support themselves while everybody benefits from their creative output. In addition, major publishers and record labels won't touch stuff that's been online because of the piracy risk. They don't want to make an investment in smaller creators without a return in the form of sales of copies. That last bit is less true of music now than it used to be because of streaming and stuff, but the principle still applies.

This is why the DMCA will never be repealed, DRM will never go away, and there is no future for general purpose computing. People want access digital content, but the creators of that content wouldn't release it at all if they knew that it could be copied endlessly by whomever receives it.

Re: Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads

#176

Post by toomuchtodo »

Andrews54757 wrote: post #88
dylan604 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For the web it requires that you run a snippet of javascript code (the challenge) in the browser to prove that you are not a bot. How does this prove you are not a bot. How does this code not work in a headless Chromimum if it's just client side JS?

Good question! Indeed you can run the challenge code using headless Chromium and it will function [1]. They are constantly updating the challenge however, and may add additional checks in the future. I suppose Google wants to make it more expensive overall to scrape Youtube to deter the most egregious bots. [1] https://github.com/LuanRT/BgUtils

LLMs solve challenges. Can we not solve these challenges with sufficiently advanced LLMs? Gemini even, if you're feeling lulz-y.

Re: Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads

#177

Post by chrisweekly »

greenavocado wrote: post #162
jasode wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If you ever wondered why the likes of Google and Cloudflare want to restrict the web I disagree with the framing of "us vs them". It's actually "us vs us". It's not just us plebians vs FAANG giants. The small-time independent publishers and creators also want to restrict the web because they don't want their content "stolen". They want to interact with real humans instead of bots. The following are manifestations of…

When Nixon slammed the gold window shut so Congress could keep writing blank checks for Vietnam and the Great Society, it wasn't just some monetary technicality. It was the moment America broke its word to the world and broke something fundamental in us too. Suddenly money wasn't something you earned through sweat or innovation anymore. It became something politicians and bankers could conjure from thin air whenever…

Wow. That was eloquent, and coherent, and depressing. I'd be grateful for someone to counter with something less dismal. Good things are still happening in the world. A positive future remains possible -- but we have to be able to imagine it to bring it into being.

Re: Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads

#180

Post by bitwize »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #144
mtrovo wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, it's really hard to blame them. In a way, the next couple of years are going to be a battle to balance easy access to info with compensation for content creators. The web as we knew it before ChatGPT was built around the idea that humans have to scavenge for information, and while they're doing that, you can show them ads. In that world, content didn't need to be too protected because you were making up…

Don’t worry! Ads are coming to AI. The big AI push next will be context, your context all the time. Your phone will “help” and get all your data to OpenAI… “It looks like you went for a run today? Good job, you deserve a treat! Studies show a little ice cream after a long run is effectively free calories! It just so happens the nearest Dairy Queen is running a promotion just for the next 30 minutes. I’m getting you d…

This is why contra Louis Rossman, Clippy was not a good thing for humanity.
Post reply on HN