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

ReVanced

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 248 posts

Re: ReVanced

#91

Post by judge2020 »

adamsmith143 wrote: post #68
nfriedly wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also restored the dislike button and added support for sponsorblock (which can automatically skip sponsor segments, as well as intros, outros, "like and subscribe" reminders, non-music sections of music videos, and other fluff.) The name comes from it being an "advanced" YouTube app, only without any "ad"s ;) Oh, and you could disable the comments section! All-in-all, it just made YouTube a much better experience.

>It also restored the dislike button As a useless button to click? I would assume youtube removed the actual functionality in the backend so what's the point of the button?

It uses an alternative backend where videos pre-removal had their dislike counters archived, and anything post-removal uses dislike data from users with the extension to crowdsource a likely dislike counter.

(in theory, if 5% of viewers of a video are people that have the extension, and only 10% of those viewers hit the dislike button, chances are that's a good sample size to assume that this video should have a 10% dislike ratio, but in practice it's probably a bit more complicated/weighted)

Re: ReVanced

#92

Post by lewispollard »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #51
Aissen wrote: post #5

Apparently Vanced was a patched YouTube app for Android, removing ads, adding a dark theme and YouTube Premium features (probably more ?). It was discontinued two weeks ago: https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/13/22975890/youtube-vanced-a...

> Apparently Vanced was a patched YouTube app This is the part I missed in the original conversations. If you redistribute a modified version of a company’s app, it’s going to be taken down. You can’t distribute another company’s work as your own. The difference here appears to be that it’s a patcher, so they’re not distributing the proprietary app. Theoretically more robust against takedowns, but it also significant…

Vanced didn't redistribute a modified version of the Youtube app, they distributed a "manager" app which downloaded the official app's APKs and applied the patches at runtime. (edit: actually, I'm not 100% sure of that, since I've always used a rooted version which does apply patches at runtime, but I'm unsure about non-rooted.)

They were taken down for using a similar enough logo to Youtube that Google lawyered them into stopping that way, not for any kind of infringement in terms of software.

Re: ReVanced

#93

Post by lern_too_spel »

Aissen wrote: post #70
Aissen wrote: post #5

Apparently Vanced was a patched YouTube app for Android, removing ads, adding a dark theme and YouTube Premium features (probably more ?). It was discontinued two weeks ago: https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/13/22975890/youtube-vanced-a...

To make it clear, personal opinion: this is piracy. Use yt-dlp, NewPipe, SmartTubeNext, invidious, VLC, whatever. Or pay for Premium. But re-using a proprietary app and patching it is IMHO crossing the line.

If they're not distributing the patched application, I don't see why this is any worse than using an unauthorized YouTube client.

Re: ReVanced

#94

Post by metadat »

henriquecm8 wrote: post #56
shultays wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Android has smarttube app which is even better (imho) compared to official youtube app, even if you pay for adfree For starters, it supports sponsorblock which is even more adblocking. Secondly i think ux is miles better You dont need root but you need to manually download and install it

That's really nice, I need to save this for when I buy an android tv

I never connect my TVs to the internet because you can't trust the manufacturers to keep them up to date and secure. And they might install more ads as part of a system "update".

Re: ReVanced

#95

Post by Flankk »

slenk wrote: post #69

It always suprises me how unwilling the tech community is to support creators on YouTube. You're not hurting YouTube by blocking ads, you're hurting the people who get ads from their videos. Just pay for Youtube Premium - its no different than Spotify or Apple music price-wise and people shell out for that without thinking every month.

Every time this discussion comes up on HN I get downvoted for being completely against adblock. It's crazy how far people will go to justify taking food off other people's plate. Usually the argument about tracking comes up. As if it's used for anything other than attempt to sell you products and services. Completely screw over small businesses and screw the content creators. On a venture capitalist forum. The hypocrisy is unreal.

Re: ReVanced

#96

Post by matheusmoreira »

slenk wrote: post #69

It always suprises me how unwilling the tech community is to support creators on YouTube. You're not hurting YouTube by blocking ads, you're hurting the people who get ads from their videos. Just pay for Youtube Premium - its no different than Spotify or Apple music price-wise and people shell out for that without thinking every month.

No. If your business model is ads, I won't support you. I'll find a way to block your ads and I'll tell everyone who will listen how to do the same. I don't appreciate being brainwashed just so creators can get paid.

Re: ReVanced

#97

Post by CuriouslyC »

slenk wrote: post #69

It always suprises me how unwilling the tech community is to support creators on YouTube. You're not hurting YouTube by blocking ads, you're hurting the people who get ads from their videos. Just pay for Youtube Premium - its no different than Spotify or Apple music price-wise and people shell out for that without thinking every month.

Maybe you didn't know this, but Google is stingy as fuck in terms of the portion of ad revenue they share with content creators. Most content creators just see youtube as a way to get exposure, then they turn around and monetize other ways like sponsors, patreon, product sales, etc.

Re: ReVanced

#99

Post by outadoc »

judge2020 wrote: post #91
adamsmith143 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It also restored the dislike button As a useless button to click? I would assume youtube removed the actual functionality in the backend so what's the point of the button?

It uses an alternative backend where videos pre-removal had their dislike counters archived, and anything post-removal uses dislike data from users with the extension to crowdsource a likely dislike counter. (in theory, if 5% of viewers of a video are people that have the extension, and only 10% of those viewers hit the dislike button, chances are that's a good sample size to assume that this video should have a 10%…

No post body was provided.

Re: ReVanced

#100

Post by CuriouslyC »

Flankk wrote: post #95
slenk wrote: post #69

It always suprises me how unwilling the tech community is to support creators on YouTube. You're not hurting YouTube by blocking ads, you're hurting the people who get ads from their videos. Just pay for Youtube Premium - its no different than Spotify or Apple music price-wise and people shell out for that without thinking every month.

Every time this discussion comes up on HN I get downvoted for being completely against adblock. It's crazy how far people will go to justify taking food off other people's plate. Usually the argument about tracking comes up. As if it's used for anything other than attempt to sell you products and services. Completely screw over small businesses and screw the content creators. On a venture capitalist forum. The hypocr…

It's because modern advertising's purpose isn't to tell people about a product they already wanted but didn't know existed (which would be fine), it's to cause people to feel a sense of fear/loss/inadequacy that they previously didn't and then present the product as a solution, or associate a product with something people love in a manipulative way, because those types of ads are worlds more effective at driving sales. That's cancer capitalism and a lot of people with principles rightly refuse to be a part of it.
Post reply on HN