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

Piped – An alternative privacy-friendly YouTube front end

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 138 posts

Re: Piped – An alternative privacy-friendly YouTube front end

#111

Post by gs17 »

mcpackieh wrote: post #63
paulryanrogers wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These won't be supported forever

Youtube wants to be a ubiquitous presence in modern culture, therefore it is in their interest to continue to support all the old and busted computers/etc that are still in common use. This includes allowing people to watch videos without an account using the old busted up computer they have in the back room at work, keeping youtube accessible on publicly shared IPs like libraries, coffee shops, even VPNs. I believe…

I would expect them to simply limit streaming quality without having an account to their standards. They tried locking 4K video behind a paywall before and people were upset, but locking it behind an account (plus WEI, but 99% of users won't know the difference) seems like it wouldn't cause outrage.

Re: Piped – An alternative privacy-friendly YouTube front end

#112

Post by FireInsight »

themoonisachees wrote: post #23
yard2010 wrote: post #16

I have to say that the crypto space is doomed and nobody cares about decentralization, but the technology behind it enables doing exactly this: 1 backend and many different clients. IMO this is the future - breaking monopolies with separation of powers a la John Locke

People care about decentralization, they don't care about projects that are thinly veiled attempts at extracting money from them under the promise of decentralization

I agree with the sentiment, but "people care about decentralization" is very debatable IMO. Most people don't care, they just want the content.

Re: Piped – An alternative privacy-friendly YouTube front end

#113

Post by gs17 »

ksherlock wrote: post #97
chipsrafferty wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have started to click "don't recommend this channel" quite a bit on YouTube shorts and I am finding it is recommending me more channels like the one that I just said I would never like to see again...

"Don't recommend this channel" flat out stopped working for me a couple weeks ago but I used to use it all the time. The best part is, every so often they show up with "want to watch something different?" which seems to be a list of everything I explicitly said I don't want to watch.

To be fair, that has a twisted logic to it. Videos you have no interest in watching definitely qualify as "something different" compared to ones you do watch.

Re: Piped – An alternative privacy-friendly YouTube front end

#114

Post by manquer »

cultureswitch wrote: post #70
cbuq wrote: post #48

Aren't these services (and even adblockers) against YouTube's TOS? As much as I don't like ads as the next person, my Google account is one thing I don't want to risk. Anybody hear of this happening or think it's a possibility down the road?

Google can block you at any time for any reason. Terms of Service are never relevant. If you're doing something many other people do, you're okay. Besides, suppose they do block you. What's the worst that going to happen? If you can think of something really bad (e.g. I'm going to lose all my photos) then you should do something to address that. Regardless.

Photos would be a one evening worth trivial task to back up to another system .

Switching your phone from android or changing an email address with hundreds of contacts over many years is far more difficult and expensive.

Google or Apple for that matter can make life difficult for a single person by banding their account , there is not a whole lot an average person can do to mitigate that risk.

Re: Piped – An alternative privacy-friendly YouTube front end

#115

Post by ohhnoodont »

cbuq wrote: post #48

Aren't these services (and even adblockers) against YouTube's TOS? As much as I don't like ads as the next person, my Google account is one thing I don't want to risk. Anybody hear of this happening or think it's a possibility down the road?

I recommend having a separate account where important data is stored (Gmail, photos) and another for everything else (search, youtube, hangouts, etc.). I also still keep personal backups of all import data (see takeout.google.com).

Re: Piped – An alternative privacy-friendly YouTube front end

#117

Post by [deleted] »

gs17 wrote: post #111
mcpackieh wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Youtube wants to be a ubiquitous presence in modern culture, therefore it is in their interest to continue to support all the old and busted computers/etc that are still in common use. This includes allowing people to watch videos without an account using the old busted up computer they have in the back room at work, keeping youtube accessible on publicly shared IPs like libraries, coffee shops, even VPNs. I believe…

I would expect them to simply limit streaming quality without having an account to their standards. They tried locking 4K video behind a paywall before and people were upset, but locking it behind an account (plus WEI, but 99% of users won't know the difference) seems like it wouldn't cause outrage.

[deleted]

Re: Piped – An alternative privacy-friendly YouTube front end

#118

Post by mcpackieh »

gs17 wrote: post #111
mcpackieh wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Youtube wants to be a ubiquitous presence in modern culture, therefore it is in their interest to continue to support all the old and busted computers/etc that are still in common use. This includes allowing people to watch videos without an account using the old busted up computer they have in the back room at work, keeping youtube accessible on publicly shared IPs like libraries, coffee shops, even VPNs. I believe…

I would expect them to simply limit streaming quality without having an account to their standards. They tried locking 4K video behind a paywall before and people were upset, but locking it behind an account (plus WEI, but 99% of users won't know the difference) seems like it wouldn't cause outrage.

> but locking it behind an account (plus WEI, but 99% of users won't know the difference) seems like it wouldn't cause outrage.

You're probably right. For my part at least, 720p video from youtube almost always satisfies me (and leaves me with more battery life anyway.)

Re: Piped – An alternative privacy-friendly YouTube front end

#119

Post by dang »

Related:

Show HN: Firefox add-on to open YouTube videos in alternative front ends - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37881771 - Oct 2023 (128 comments)

Tell HN: Cloudflare Is Blocking Piped - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33667236 - Nov 2022 (120 comments)

LibreTube: Alternative YouTube front end for Android built with Piped - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30746420 - March 2022 (46 comments)

Piped: A privacy-friendly YouTube front end which is efficient by design - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27869188 - July 2021 (230 comments)

Re: Piped – An alternative privacy-friendly YouTube front end

#120

Post by dontlaugh »

rglullis wrote: post #100
yard2010 wrote: post #16

I have to say that the crypto space is doomed and nobody cares about decentralization, but the technology behind it enables doing exactly this: 1 backend and many different clients. IMO this is the future - breaking monopolies with separation of powers a la John Locke

Let's see: - Youtube Premium: 11.99€/month - Spotify: 10.99€/month - Netflix: 15.99€/month - DAZN: 29.99€/month Putting together a server to store and serve all this content for myself, my family and even some friends: 750€, on a generous configuration. Germany has this "TV tax" (I think the UK as well) which they charge you 18€/month supposedly to help with the production of the public broadcasting networks. I'd rea…

With second hand parts, I managed £300.
Post reply on HN