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

The campaign to shut down YouTube-dl continues

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 266 posts

Re: The campaign to shut down YouTube-dl continues

#181

Post by hirako2000 »

madeofpalk wrote: post #145
lazzlazzlazz wrote: post #76

How can we create a video platform with high-quality discovery, personalization, subscriptions, comments, voting, and more — while also making it technically incapable of being evil and closed? Are there technologies that we can use to allow network effects to accumulate to software that isn't controlled by a single, rent-extracting, and private entity?

What happens when someone uploads universally abhorrent, illegal, immoral, and harmful videos?

that's a matter of opinion. i find YouTube filled with plenty of videos I would deem immoral, harmful, abhorrent. they remain there. and that's fine, nobody forces me to watch them.

Re: The campaign to shut down YouTube-dl continues

#182

Post by irrational »

heavyset_go wrote: post #66
irrational wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, if I don’t use Windows then I’m fine?

You'll be locked out of using your hardware's full potential, same goes for the software and media you use, too. Look at how Nvidia already locks nouveau developers out of using their GPUs' full power with cryptography.

Well, I haven’t used Windows since 2002. I’ve been fine with my hardware speeds so far.

Re: The campaign to shut down YouTube-dl continues

#183

Post by hirako2000 »

Mindwipe wrote: post #169
usrbinbash wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't imagine it's hard to find a hosting provider in one of the other 194 countries.

The German verdict would apply EU wide unless another court overrules it, and is useful precedent to getting similar judgements elsewhere. To be honest though, I don't think they need to win, just get clarity. YouTube have almost certainly committed to the labels that they do apply DRM to YouTube videos containing their content, and are telling them that the rolling cypher is it. If the labels take it to court and th…

it's a cat and mouse game that mice have kept winning. Pretending DRM is even technically an option to curtail abuses (or fair copies) is naive at best. a fallacy at worst.

also to note that it is companies that act illegally in preventing fair use of copyrighted content. it's a battle where both sides pretty much decided to ignore the law. since registered companies are meant to respect the law to continue to operate, and pirates, well they are pirates and prosecuted for it, if caught, I opt for the court to instead compel YouTube, and its media partners to provide DRM free content so that everyone else, consumers, can enjoy the rights granted by law to make fair copies of content. that would resolve the matter once and for good.

Re: The campaign to shut down YouTube-dl continues

#184

Post by hirako2000 »

zirobi wrote: post #103
danuker wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no end in sight. My guess is the point is to make it difficult to get videos from their platform without seeing the ads.

Google being Google: Decides it has the requisite resources to get into an arms race with both adblockers and the open source community.

bring it on.

Re: The campaign to shut down YouTube-dl continues

#185

Post by foo_barrio »

syshum wrote: post #156
armada651 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> plus the analogue hole is disappearing rapidly As long as you can aim a camera at a monitor or put a Bluetooth speaker next to a microphone the analogue loop hole will never disappear.

if that becomes the only avenue to rip a movie wide spread distribution of said movie with out permission will die The idea that you would have lots of people getting up camera's and monitors to record a movie for distribution on the internet is laughable, and it would be a cam quality today so you would just end up with the early releases capture via someone setting in a theater which are generally poor quality

I think software can create a good version of a video taken from a middle-tier camera. My 8-year-old DSLR, Nikon D750, can take 4k video at 60fps. Its sensor has more dynamic range than even high-end screens can produce. When I take a picture of my TV I can see individual pixels. That camera can capture every bit of info my screen is putting out. I bet from a 4k/60fps video from my camera you can process it to produce something closer to a 1080p/30fps BlueRay rip.

This was not the case with handy-cam theater rips. Those things were at best 480p and could never capture the picture projected on a screen even in the best conditions.

Re: The campaign to shut down YouTube-dl continues

#186

Post by ziml77 »

syshum wrote: post #156
armada651 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> plus the analogue hole is disappearing rapidly As long as you can aim a camera at a monitor or put a Bluetooth speaker next to a microphone the analogue loop hole will never disappear.

if that becomes the only avenue to rip a movie wide spread distribution of said movie with out permission will die The idea that you would have lots of people getting up camera's and monitors to record a movie for distribution on the internet is laughable, and it would be a cam quality today so you would just end up with the early releases capture via someone setting in a theater which are generally poor quality

Then people will make a complex device that hooks in where the LED/LCD grid does and converts the signals intended to drive the panel into a video feed for recording. And making a device that directly takes the output of a Bluetooth device's DAC (or even grabbing the digital output directly) should be even trivial.

Re: The campaign to shut down YouTube-dl continues

#187

Post by charrondev »

kaladin-jasnah wrote: post #154
Nextgrid wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish the media industry understood this and took action. A lot of what they call "piracy" is less about people not wanting to pay and more about the paid experience being on-par if not worse than the pirate experience.

I wholeheartedly agree. With video games, especially on Linux, it is far better to pay. On Steam, it was far easier to just pay and click Play than to pirate the gane and deal with Wine and getting the game to work. So I pay.

Gaming in particular is an area where I think most marketplaces have gotten their act together. I don’t hesitate to buy games through Steam or the Microsoft store.

Games are easy to pay for, fast to download and I know at least steam and Epic have a very reasonable refund policy (if you have less than 2 hours of playtime they will refund you without issue). I’ve used this a couple times for games that either had many technical issues on launch or I didn’t like the mechanics of the game.

The only game store that is absolutely terrible in all of this is EA/Origin who have a very buggy and slow client. I just avoid their games as a result.

Re: The campaign to shut down YouTube-dl continues

#188

Post by CuriouslyC »

madeofpalk wrote: post #143
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think maybe this was true five years ago, but at some point they decided to turn the screws and really ramp up advertising. I don’t follow their financials but I assume the site was self sufficient with far fewer ads than today, and that now they are extracting profit (rents) from their established behemoth. Of course I could be wrong.

Of course they're trying to make a profit. Youtube, Google, nor Alphabet are a charity. "Profit is inherently evil" is a difficult point of view to have on this venture captial forum.

I think advertising is evil is the sentiment, and that's not out of place in a forum that has a focus on building a better future, rather than making money any way possible.

Re: The campaign to shut down YouTube-dl continues

#189

Post by falcolas »

mschuster91 wrote: post #121
scarygliders wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The real issue is company ownership is anti-democratic Wrong. Company ownership is perfectly democratic. > need to have some ownership share over the company because it effects us politically This happens now with share ownership. > AKA bobby kotick can say to his employee's "make games with drm" and the employee's must obey or be fired, that is the fundamnetal problem with capitalism in a nutshell. Every single ti…

> Wrong. Company ownership is perfectly democratic. It's not because a lot of shares end up owned by one of the few large ETF/pension plan administrators: in 88% of the S&P 500 companies [1], Vanguard/BlackRock/State Street together own the majority of the shares, and at least the passive ETF-held parts usually do not participate in voting which means that tiny "activist" investors now have a lot more vote percentage…

Plus, I ask when did democracy get defined as “those who can pay get a say”?

Also, non-public companies exist.

Re: The campaign to shut down YouTube-dl continues

#190

Post by falcolas »

paulcole wrote: post #175
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think maybe this was true five years ago, but at some point they decided to turn the screws and really ramp up advertising. I don’t follow their financials but I assume the site was self sufficient with far fewer ads than today, and that now they are extracting profit (rents) from their established behemoth. Of course I could be wrong.

You know you can pay YouTube like $10 a month and never see an ad again, right?

Your views are also worth more to the creators. That isn’t to say there are not other issues with creators and wringing money from the Google branded stone.
Post reply on HN