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

Yt-dlp: External JavaScript runtime now required for full YouTube support

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 646 posts

Re: Yt-dlp: External JavaScript runtime now required for full YouTube support

#321

Post by ryandrake »

usrbinbash wrote: post #191
Tabular-Iceberg wrote: post #51

I remember when QuickTime came out in 1991 and it was obvious to everyone that video should be copied, pasted and saved like any arbitrary data. It's absolutely insane to me how bad the user experience is with video nowadays, even video that's not encumbered by DRM or complex JavaScript clients.

> It's absolutely insane to me how bad the user experience is with video nowadays Has nothing to do with video per se. Normal embeddings, using the standard ` ` element and no unnecessary JS nonsense, still work the same way they did in the 90s: Right click the video and download it, it's a media element like any other. The reason why user experience is going to shite, is because turbocapitalism went to work on what…

I've always found it insane how much software development web sites are willing to undertake, just to avoid using the standard video, audio, and img HTML elements. It's almost hilarious how over engineered everything is, just so they can 'protect' things they are ultimately publishing on the open web.

Re: Yt-dlp: External JavaScript runtime now required for full YouTube support

#322

Post by ryandrake »

trvz wrote: post #96
ivanjermakov wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Popular self-hosted solution: https://github.com/tubearchivist/tubearchivist

You people always make everything more complicated than necessary. yt-dlp -o '%(uploader)s/%(upload_date)s - %(title)s [%(id)s].%(ext)s' --cookies-from-browser chrome https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=LL

Someone should put together and publish a docker container that does that.

Re: Yt-dlp: External JavaScript runtime now required for full YouTube support

#323

Post by Valulz »

kragen wrote: post #301
doublerabbit wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of the old YTPs were fantastic. They don't exist now. Generations of talent & creativity just gone.

What's a "YTP"?

YouTube poop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouTube_Poop

Re: Yt-dlp: External JavaScript runtime now required for full YouTube support

#324

Post by ranger_danger »

mschuster91 wrote: post #291
WD-42 wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Glad to hear it’s faster now! YouTube barely works in a full-on browser these days, props to the team that keeps it accessible via a Python script!

> YouTube barely works in a full-on browser these days Agreed. Shorts about half the time don't display comments, the back button breaks in mysterious ways. And I use Chrome on both Intel and M macOS machines, so the best in class there is, but my Windows Chrome doesn't fare much better. And Adblock ain't at fault, I pay for premium. And that's just the technical side. The content side is even worse, comments section…

I use an extension that turns shorts back into regular videos, and another one that undoes the auto-dubbing when watching videos in a (different) language that I understand.

With that, uBO and Sponsorblock, I never see any ads and have a great YT experience. (I don't have premium either)

Re: Yt-dlp: External JavaScript runtime now required for full YouTube support

#325

Post by tracker1 »

crazygringo wrote: post #70
netsharc wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if it has to be a real computer, display, and camera, or if doing it with a "headless display" that is nonetheless being fed to a "video recorder" would work... Funny how it'd be like The Matrix...

It depends on a lot of factors. But even if it works in a virtual machine, your CPU is going to be pegged at 100% the whole time to handle the re-encoding. Unless you use a hardware h.264 encoder, but then the quality is pretty terrible since it's explicitly optimized for speed over quality and isn't tunable the way software encoders are. It's always doable, it's just an option of last resort. You always just want to…

I think the real key is to only compress enough initially so that you don't blow out your storage in terms of size and throughput... Once you have the stream captured at a higher quality, you can always recompress more optimally.

A relatively low compression with hardware h.264 will still take up a lot less space and throughput than mpeg-2 or raw.

Re: Yt-dlp: External JavaScript runtime now required for full YouTube support

#326

Post by recursive »

latexr wrote: post #302
recursive wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use YouTube on a daily basis. I haven't seen any of these problems.

Are you using Chrome or a Chromium browser? From experience and reports I’ve seen, that seems to make a huge difference.

Firefox

Re: Yt-dlp: External JavaScript runtime now required for full YouTube support

#327

Post by mapmeld »

crazygringo wrote: post #19
reddalo wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can't shut off browser access, but they surely can kill all non-Chromium browsers.

No, they can't. Way too many devices, including televisions, access YT via all sorts of browsers. Not to mention antitrust would be all over that. With their dominant browser share, getting people to switch to Chrome by removing access to YT for Firefox would get multiple governments filing lawsuits ASAP.

What OS are televisions using to run all of their streaming media apps? It's not iOS.

Re: Yt-dlp: External JavaScript runtime now required for full YouTube support

#328

Post by MangoToupe »

Aurornis wrote: post #187
Tabular-Iceberg wrote: post #51

I remember when QuickTime came out in 1991 and it was obvious to everyone that video should be copied, pasted and saved like any arbitrary data. It's absolutely insane to me how bad the user experience is with video nowadays, even video that's not encumbered by DRM or complex JavaScript clients.

> It's absolutely insane to me how bad the user experience is with video nowadays, even video that's not encumbered by DRM or complex JavaScript clients. The video experience for typical video files is great these days compared to the past. I think you may be viewing the past through rose colored glasses. For years it was a pain to deal with video because you had to navigate third party players (remember Real Player?…

> For years it was a pain to deal with video because you had to navigate third party players (remember Real Player?), Flash plugins, and sketchy codec pack installs from adware infested download sites.

How is this any worse than what YouTube does now? Real Player and flash never made you watch ads.

Re: Yt-dlp: External JavaScript runtime now required for full YouTube support

#329

Post by ranger_danger »

ivankra wrote: post #315
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What environment are you using that: - Has access to Youtube - Can run Python code - Can’t run JS code If the concern is security, it sounds like the team went to great lengths to ensure the JS was sandboxed (as long as you’re using Deno). If you’re using some sort of weird OS or architecture that Deno/Node doesn’t support, you might consider QuickJS, which is written in pure C and should work on anything. (Although…

> Although it will be a lot slower, I’m not clear just how slow. Around 30-50x slower than V8 (node/deno). I've been recently benchmarking a lot of different engines: https://ivankra.github.io/javascript-zoo/

> Around 30-50x slower than V8 (node/deno).

A solver running at 50ms instead of 1ms I would say is practically imperceptible to most users, but I don't know what time span you are measuring with those numbers.

Re: Yt-dlp: External JavaScript runtime now required for full YouTube support

#330

Post by weaksauce »

cons0le wrote: post #293
ConceptJunkie wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no problems with YouTube at all. Perhaps it's because I pay for Premium (primarily to get YouTube music). Regardless, Google services getting worse over time is becoming a law rather than a tendency.

I don't get the value ad of youtube music. Everything's already on youtube and they let you make playlists, and they have playlists of the top charts already. What else does youtube music get you? I can play on my phone with the screen off with yt vanced ( and I would never pay just for that feature, because I remember when it was free and they took it away )

> I can play on my phone with the screen off with yt vanced

there's a lot of iphone/ipad users out there.

> Everything's already on youtube and they let you make playlists, and they have playlists of the top charts already

I don't use it but ui probably. ads maybe. plenty of people have money and don't want the inconvenience of trying to get around it.

Post reply on HN