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

Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

621–630 of 635 posts

Re: Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads

#621

Post by TeMPOraL »

int_19h wrote: post #614
a96 wrote: post #604

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If only sites agreed on putting a machine readable URL somewhere that lists all items by date. Like a site summary or a syndication stream. And maybe like a "map" of a static site. It would be so easy to share their updates with other interested systems.

Why should they agree to make life even easier for people doing something they don't want?

You've summarized the main problem with the Internet for the past 2+ decades.

Everyone thinks they're a master fisher, and gets up in arms about those pesky users not acting dumb fish, instead trying to eat the content bait without biting the monetization hook.

Re: Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads

#622

Post by Dylan16807 »

immibis wrote: post #620
Dylan16807 wrote: post #599

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And it would be impossible to bail out those bonds when they defaulted Well the US hasn't defaulted so changing how a default works wouldn't really affect the trajectory we took. And a default would be pretty catastrophic either way. > nor to reuse the bonds to back money. I don't know what you mean here.

Well the US isn't on the gold standard. If it was on the gold standard then it would have defaulted. That's why it moved off the gold standard. Actually, by moving off the gold standard, it defaulted on dollars (at the time a kind of gold bond) rather than defaulting on dollar-denominated government bonds.

Why would it have defaulted?

Re: Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads

#623

Post by averageRoyalty »

amatecha wrote: post #462
averageRoyalty wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Yeah because everyone who has a user experience feedback about a piece of software is magically a skilled programmer? The smug "PRs accepted" doesn't help anyone. Expressing hope for a feature at least shows potential implementers that the feature is wanted.

I felt I was replying to rudeness with rudeness of a similar tone. GP called an open source project "sucky" for not having a feature they wanted. Calling that "expressing hope" feels a stretch to me.

Re: Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads

#624

Post by ynx »

1317 wrote: post #452
ynx wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

JIT is still banned by policy on a LOT of mobile devices, meaning that previous usage of yt-dlp on mobile is now effectively unsupportable.

well yt-dlp would also be banned surely? so it's not an issue anyway

nope, python can be interpreted!

Re: Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads

#625

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

nebula8804 wrote: post #441
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t worry! Ads are coming to AI. The big AI push next will be context, your context all the time. Your phone will “help” and get all your data to OpenAI… “It looks like you went for a run today? Good job, you deserve a treat! Studies show a little ice cream after a long run is effectively free calories! It just so happens the nearest Dairy Queen is running a promotion just for the next 30 minutes. I’m getting you d…

If open source AI becomes good enough would this model hold? I guess they will try to shut down the open models as they come close?

Depends on scaling.

But remember, the model is the engine.

Your ChatGPT, Claude’s, etc are products. They run on LLMs but also code and tools on the backend.

Run a local model all you want, it’ll never make a fillable PDF for you or remember your context on its own.

Re: Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads

#626

Post by Barbing »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #456
Barbing wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All that testing and they've never thought to offer a one-tap way to get back into speed control once I've adjusted the speed one or more times on the same video. Don’t get me started on the “highest quality” account setting absolutely never selecting 4K options when available. They simply have to try to save the bandwidth money by nesting quality options a couple taps away. (A userscript fixes this on desktop and ev…

This is becoming a common pattern everywhere now. Case in point (and sorry for bringing up this topic), LLM providers seem to be doubling down on automatic model selection, and marketing it as a feature that improves experience and response quality for the users, even though it's a blatant attempt to cut serving costs down by tricking users (or taking the choice away) into querying a cheaper, weaker model. It's obvio…

How’d I miss this!

Bloomberg, March 24, 2020:

“YouTube to Limit Video Quality Around the World for a Month”

Guess it’s like a “temporary” tax… how’s a tax ever going to go away once collection starts :)

Re: Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads

#627

Post by Beretta_Vexee »

cylemons wrote: post #619
Beretta_Vexee wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.w3schools.com/tags/canvas_getimagedata.asp

So the way this works is to draw fonts/svgs inside the canvas and check the pixels, that makes sense

This is just one element among many others. They probably have many available and others in reserve in case one becomes obsolete.

I recently discovered that audio codecs, frequencies, resolution, mix volume, etc. are accessible via JS in the browser and that this allows fingerprinting. Since we are talking about YouTube, the same type of technique should be possible with video codecs.

Re: Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads

#628

Post by greenavocado »

habinero wrote: post #582
greenavocado wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When Nixon slammed the gold window shut so Congress could keep writing blank checks for Vietnam and the Great Society, it wasn't just some monetary technicality. It was the moment America broke its word to the world and broke something fundamental in us too. Suddenly money wasn't something you earned through sweat or innovation anymore. It became something politicians and bankers could conjure from thin air whenever…

Sir, this is a Wendy's. The gold standard is objectively terrible economic policy and "society was better when I was young" has been a meme for thousands of years. It feels nice to attribute everything bad to this one weird trick, but it's fake.

19th-century factory towns sucked dick. Child labor, no safety nets, cholera outbreaks. Yeah, not exactly Disneyland. But that's not the argument. The gold standard didn't cause those horrors. Unchecked capitalism and shitty labor laws did. What gold did do was force a brutal honesty. You couldn't fake prosperity. If you wanted a war or a welfare program, you either taxed people directly or found the gold to pay for it. No printing press to hide the pain. Nixon's 1971 move didn't just detach the dollar from gold. It detached political accountability from fiscal reality. Every fucking crisis since '71 gets "solved" the same way: print, borrow, and kick the can. Gold didn't prevent recessions; it prevented this: a system where elites privatize gains but socialize losses. Your grandpa's $0.25/hour wage in 1950 bought 10 loaves of bread. Your $15/hour today buys 3 loaves. Your 401k inflates, your rent explodes, and Washington shrugs: "Inflation's transitory, bro!"

Gold "terrible"? Tell that to the single mom paying 40% of her paycheck to rent a BlackRock-owned apartment. Why's BlackRock her landlord? Because fiat made debt cheaper than dirt. They borrowed billions at 0% from the Fed, bought entire neighborhoods, and jacked rents. Under gold? Interest rates would've spiked, crushing their leveraged bets. But nah. We got "QE Infinity" instead. Today's policy is literally cronyism with extra steps: print to bail out banks which causes inflated assets which squeezes workers. Rinse. Repeat.

Re: Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads

#629

Post by greenavocado »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #622
immibis wrote: post #620

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well the US isn't on the gold standard. If it was on the gold standard then it would have defaulted. That's why it moved off the gold standard. Actually, by moving off the gold standard, it defaulted on dollars (at the time a kind of gold bond) rather than defaulting on dollar-denominated government bonds.

Why would it have defaulted?

Nixon didn't abandon gold because economists suddenly discovered some brilliant new theory. He did it because the math had already sentenced the system to death. By August '71, Fort Knox was down to its last $11 billion in gold while foreign governments held at least $33 billion in paper dollars screaming for redemption. That's not a liquidity problem. That's a corpse with rigor mortis. And that's just the official tally; the real killer was the eurodollar market, that offshore shadow banking system nobody wanted to talk about, where another $50-70 billion in unredeemable IOUs were sloshing around. Meanwhile, Washington was drowning in $400 billion of federal debt with inflation hitting 6% which was a death spiral where every new bond issuance needed higher interest rates to attract suckers, which only accelerated the bleed-out. France wasn't just cashing checks; they were sending battleships to haul away physical gold while the Fed played musical chairs with reserves. Default wasn't a choice. It was inevitable. Nixon just picked how to default: either formally welch on bond payments (catastrophic) or slam the gold window shut (disguised catastrophe). He chose the quiet betrayal, letting the dollar become pure fiat so Congress could keep funding Vietnam and welfare programs without taxing a soul. That's the original sin. Not just breaking gold's back, but breaking the link between spending and accountability. Fast forward to today: $35 trillion in debt, BRICS nations stockpiling gold while ditching dollars, and your grocery bill doubling not because of "supply chains" but because we've spent fifty years printing to paper over every bad bet. Nixon didn't save the economy. He gave politicians a credit card with no limit and told your grandchildren to pick up the tab.

Re: Yt-dlp: Upcoming new requirements for YouTube downloads

#630

Post by greenavocado »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #562
chrisweekly wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow. That was eloquent, and coherent, and depressing. I'd be grateful for someone to counter with something less dismal. Good things are still happening in the world. A positive future remains possible -- but we have to be able to imagine it to bring it into being.

Semi coherent. The greed and corruption is a real theme but would still be 100% possible while on the gold standard.

You're goddamn right corruption existed under gold. Nobody's claiming it was some purity paradise. But here's the difference: gold didn't enable systemic looting on a planetary scale. Gold didn't prevent sin. it prevented the industrialization of sin. The robber barons were sharks in a pond. Today's fiat-enabled oligarchs are gods reshaping reality. When you can print the fucking rules, accountability evaporates. That's why Nixon's 1971 decision wasn't just policy. It was an engraved invitation for the largest wealth transfer in human history.

Greed and corruption absolutely festered under the gold standard. Boss Tweed embezzled a fortune from New York City coffers, Vanderbilt strong-armed railroads, and Rockefeller crushed competitors with predatory pricing. But here's the huge distinction: gold acted like a leash on a rabid dog. It didn't kill the beast, but it kept it from devouring the whole goddamn village. When robber barons got too greedy in the 1800s, their schemes imploded under gold's brutal discipline. Jay Cooke's bank collapsed in 1873? No Fed stepped in with trillions in printed cash to resurrect his corpse. Markets purged the rot, losers ate shit, and the system reset in years. Not decades of zombie corporations propped up by cheap debt. Corruption back then was like a bar fight: bloody, ugly, but contained. Tweed stole existing gold coins. He couldn't order the Treasury to mint him a fresh fortune overnight.

Vanderbilt couldn't borrow billions at 0% interest from a central bank to buy every competitor; he had to convince investors with real profits, not financialized vapor. Fast-forward to today: fiat didn't invent greed. It weaponized it. LBJ funded Vietnam and the Great Society without raising taxes because the printer go brrr. BlackRock gobbles neighborhoods with Fed-subsidized debt while renters bleed. Tyson jacks food prices 20%, blames "inflation," and pockets record profits because fiat decouples prices from real value. Banks peddle toxic mortgages knowing the Fed will bail them out. Politicians pass $6T "stimulus" bills while your paycheck buys less bread than a 1950s factory worker's. That's the cancer Nixon unleashed in '71. Not corruption itself, but its metastasis into a globalized, systemic looting operation where elites privatize gains, socialize losses, and inflation becomes a tax on the powerless. Gold didn't stop crooks. It stopped crooks from becoming untouchable gods. The 1800s proved humans will always be greedy. Fiat just gave them the universe's credit card and told your grandkids to foot the bill.

Post reply on HN