Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads

Post by a96 » Fri, Sep 26, 2025, 7:23 AM UTC

cactusplant7374 wrote: post #37

piyuv wrote: post #9

I’m a paying YouTube premium subscriber. Last weekend, I wanted to download something so I can watch it on my way in the train. The app got stuck at “waiting for download..” on my iPad. Same on iPhone. Restart did not work. I gave up after an hour (30 mins hands on trying stuff, 30 mins waiting for it to fix itself). Downloaded the video using yt-dlp, transferred it to my USB c flash drive, and watched it from that.…

Why not use Brave browser and their playlist feature for offline downloads?

Post by a96 » Fri, Sep 26, 2025, 7:33 AM UTC

pjc50 wrote: post #273

daemin wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This 1kb os json still sounds like a modern thing, where you need to download many MB of JavaScript code to execute and display the 1kb json data. What you want is to just download the 10-20kb html file, maybe a corresponding css file, and any images referenced by the html. Then if you want the video you just get the video file direct. Simple and effective, unless you have something to sell.

The main reason for doing video through JS in the first place, other than obfuscation, is variable bitrate support. Oddly enough some TVs will support variable bitrate HLS directly, and I believe Apple devices, but not regular browsers. See https://github.com/video-dev/hls.js/ > unless you have something to sell Video hosting and its moderation is not cheap, sadly. Which is why we don't see many competitors.

Post by a96 » Fri, Sep 26, 2025, 7:46 AM UTC

einpoklum wrote: post #408

dotancohen wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To how many content creators have you written to request them share their content on PeerTube or BitTorrent? How did they respond? How will they monetize?

1. Zero 2. N/A, but enough content creators on YT are very much aware of the kind of prison it is, especially in the years after the Adpocalypse. 3. Obviously, nobody should be able to monetize the copying of content. If it is released, it is publicly released. But they can use LibrePay/Patreon/Buy me a coffee, they can sell merch or signed copies of things, they can do live appearances, etc.

Post by a96 » Fri, Sep 26, 2025, 7:54 AM UTC

goku12 wrote: post #537

bitwize wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 addit…

That isn't entirely true. Perhaps it's because small content creators aren't a monolithic group. There are a few who try the alternative approaches and succeed. For example, whenever buying ebooks, I first check if the author sells it directly or through small publishers. It's always a better deal if they do. Cheaper than what you pay on amzn, DRM-free and occasionally lifetime free updates (eg: The Kubernetes book b…

Post by a96 » Fri, Sep 26, 2025, 8:22 AM UTC

MangoToupe wrote: post #36

At some point we’re going to need a better place to put videos than YouTube. The lack of any democratization of bulk storage is beginning to be a real problem on the internet. Yes, we have archive.org. We need more than that, though. I’m sure there’s some distributed solution like IPFS but I haven’t seen any serious attempt to make this accessible to every day people.