Live data from Hacker News

YouTube slows down video load times when using Firefox

old.reddit.com

371–380 of 486 posts

Re: YouTube slows down video load times when using Firefox

#371

From reddit discussion ( https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/17ywbjj/comment/k9... ): > To clarify it more, it's simply this code in their polymer script link: > setTimeout(function() { c(); a.resolve(1) }, 5E3); > which doesn't do anything except making you wait 5s (5E3 = 5000ms = 5s). You can search for it easily in https://www.youtube.com/s/desktop/96766c85/jsbin/desktop_pol...

That is not correct. The surrounding code gives some more context: h=document.createElement("video");l=new Blob([new Uint8Array([/* snip */])],{type:"video/webm"}); h.src=lc(Mia(l));h.ontimeupdate=function(){c();a.resolve(0)}; e.appendChild(h);h.classList.add("html5-main-video");setTimeout(function(){e.classList.add("ad-interrupting")},200); setTimeout(function(){c();a.resolve(1)},5E3); return m.return(a.promise)})}…

Okay, I'm sold on the delay, but where's the code that detects non-chrome?

Do they serve different js based on the user agent header? If they delay chrome too there's no foul.

Re: YouTube slows down video load times when using Firefox

#372
post #328
post #170

Another "Youtube is doing shit" thread and yet not a single mention of Peertube. https://joinpeertube.org/en So for all people uploading videos, please have a look at Peertube. It is to Youtube what Mastodon is to Twitter. (and more: it is compatible with Mastodon, one can subscribe to your Peertube channel through his/her mastodon account). I’m not arguing to leave Youtube completely but to offer an alternative to y…

I think Rumble [1] is the most valid competitor at the moment. [1] https://rumble.com/

That's some off-putting content to show new users. I suspect they're an ideologically driven platform?

*edit, their press release section removes all doubt.

Re: YouTube slows down video load times when using Firefox

#373
post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not correct. The surrounding code gives some more context: h=document.createElement("video");l=new Blob([new Uint8Array([/* snip */])],{type:"video/webm"}); h.src=lc(Mia(l));h.ontimeupdate=function(){c();a.resolve(0)}; e.appendChild(h);h.classList.add("html5-main-video");setTimeout(function(){e.classList.add("ad-interrupting")},200); setTimeout(function(){c();a.resolve(1)},5E3); return m.return(a.promise)})}…

Okay, I'm sold on the delay, but where's the code that detects non-chrome? Do they serve different js based on the user agent header? If they delay chrome too there's no foul.

Just going off this tweet, it seems to be user-agent based: https://fixupx.com/endermanch/status/1726605997698068630

Re: YouTube slows down video load times when using Firefox

#374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These sounds like classic MS behaviour. It is kind of thing that ought to addressed in anti-trust case.

I've posted this here on HN numerous times over the years, and it's been a while since I last posted it: Google is the new "Microsoft", they embrace, they extend, then extinguish. Look at their email offering, messaging offerings, they built on top of XMPP, then they pulled the plug eventually. Android is Linux based, but insanely proprietary, the app store is not open by any means, you're fully at their whims to get…

don't forget the old Microsoft is still here. We have two Microsofts now!

Re: YouTube slows down video load times when using Firefox

#375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not correct. The surrounding code gives some more context: h=document.createElement("video");l=new Blob([new Uint8Array([/* snip */])],{type:"video/webm"}); h.src=lc(Mia(l));h.ontimeupdate=function(){c();a.resolve(0)}; e.appendChild(h);h.classList.add("html5-main-video");setTimeout(function(){e.classList.add("ad-interrupting")},200); setTimeout(function(){c();a.resolve(1)},5E3); return m.return(a.promise)})}…

I couldn't reproduce the 5s wait in multiple scenarios in Firefox (various combinations of being logged in / not being logged in / without adblocker / with adblocker) and couldn't reproduce a 5s wait time in any of them, it played back immediately in each case (when without adblocker, using a second video to have one start without ad). I tested on Linux. What exact combination of circumstances is required to trigger…

I am experiencing delay on both Firefox and Waterfox

Re: YouTube slows down video load times when using Firefox

#376
I recently got a new Mac and didn’t install Chrome. I now only run Firefox and Safari. For a company so big, it’s embarrassing to see their websites and products be some of the poorest run on my computer now. It’s quite obvious that they at least optimize it for Chrome if not de-optimize it for other browsers.

Re: YouTube slows down video load times when using Firefox

#377
post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but assuming we take it as face value that this is a straightforward attempt to force a UX-destroying delay, I don't see what makes this so terrible. It's meant to force a 5 second wait, and it does it. Problem solved.

The 5-second wait is the issue, not the means it was obtained -- a fixed wait time either wastes the user's time (by making it take longer than necessary) or is prone to bugs (if the awaited task takes >5 seconds, then the end of the timer will likely break). The better question is _why_ a 5-second wait was necessary, and there's almost certainly a better way to handle that need without the fixed wait time.

OPs point, I think, is that wasting the user's time is part of the point of the code. This specific code seems partially meant as a punishment of the user for using an adblocker.

Re: YouTube slows down video load times when using Firefox

#378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something related to this which I find extremely frustrating is that I'm capable of watching a 4k video in my browser just fine. So if I decide to buy or rent a movie on youtube, they can only be played back at 420p. Apparently this is due to DRM restrictions, but the frustrating part is that you can pay extra money for the HD version and there's nothing telling you about this not being supported in your browser unti…

Netflix does the same thing. Actually, speaking of infuriating corporate bullshit, allow me to go on a rant about Netflix and subtitles. They give you the option to choose between like four, maybe five languages. That's it! If you want subtitles in any of the other hundred or so languages that they have available, well... no. Just no. Learn one of the four they've picked for you. If you call their support, they'll ga…

I have to add two adjacent subtitle-related stupidities on Netflix:

1. Closed captions (CC). Okay, I'm willing to accept they improve the experience of a show / movie for a non-zero number of people. What I absolutely don't accept is CC being the ONLY VERSION OF ENGLISH SUBTITLES available. Either CC or nothing. I can't be the only one who prefers English subtitles for English-spoken media, while NOT needing every single sound described as [wet squelching] or [quirky synth music].

(Bonus points for everyone who recognizes those specific examples ↑)

2. Subtitles in all-caps. For the entire movie. Just why? If I'm able to read the text in time at all (it is widely known that words and sentences in all-caps are slower to read), then I'll just feel everyone's screaming all the time, even if they aren't. Whose idea was this? And also here, to my knowledge it only affects English. (I believe all Nolan movies got this "treatment" for example.)

There have been several occasions where even though it was readily available for me to stream from Netflix, I pirated a show or movie anyway, specifically to avoid one or both of these issues.

Re: YouTube slows down video load times when using Firefox

#379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not correct. The surrounding code gives some more context: h=document.createElement("video");l=new Blob([new Uint8Array([/* snip */])],{type:"video/webm"}); h.src=lc(Mia(l));h.ontimeupdate=function(){c();a.resolve(0)}; e.appendChild(h);h.classList.add("html5-main-video");setTimeout(function(){e.classList.add("ad-interrupting")},200); setTimeout(function(){c();a.resolve(1)},5E3); return m.return(a.promise)})}…

I couldn't reproduce the 5s wait in multiple scenarios in Firefox (various combinations of being logged in / not being logged in / without adblocker / with adblocker) and couldn't reproduce a 5s wait time in any of them, it played back immediately in each case (when without adblocker, using a second video to have one start without ad). I tested on Linux. What exact combination of circumstances is required to trigger…

I just tested this in firefox on ubuntu. Three subsequent new tab tests.

Load: 4.34s, 5.14, 2.96, 3.35

DOMContentLoaded: 3.65s, 4.56, 2.92, 3.33

Finish: 13.14s, 10.77, 8.49, 12.02

So it's getting a bit faster over time, but still heinous, and crucially, it isn't hanging on requests. Individual asset GET/POST requests are taking tens of ms, worst was a few parallel 254ms GETs on a cold start. Usually 50-70ms. But there is a flurry of requests, then a period of very few requests until 5s after init, then another flurry.

Firefox 119.0 Ubuntu 22.04 uBlock Origin, Privacy Badger

Same OS, chrome 115.0.5790.170, no blockers, youtube is much snappier, it still definitely takes a few seconds to paint thumbnails, but it's basically done by 5s. DOMContentloaded is never more than 1.75s, finish Firefox private window with blockers off has similar time statistics. But actually doubleclick.net is still getting bounced.

Re: YouTube slows down video load times when using Firefox

#380
post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not correct. The surrounding code gives some more context: h=document.createElement("video");l=new Blob([new Uint8Array([/* snip */])],{type:"video/webm"}); h.src=lc(Mia(l));h.ontimeupdate=function(){c();a.resolve(0)}; e.appendChild(h);h.classList.add("html5-main-video");setTimeout(function(){e.classList.add("ad-interrupting")},200); setTimeout(function(){c();a.resolve(1)},5E3); return m.return(a.promise)})}…

It is still better to wait 5s without ad than with ad.

I wonder if it is just a coincidence that 5s is the time before a skippable ad becomes skippable?
Post reply on HN