4 ms·

If we're getting to the point where we need to decrypt things and reverse engineer protocols, maybe we should... not use these devices? Maybe we should opt out

If we're getting to the point where we need to decrypt things and reverse engineer protocols, maybe we should... not use these devices? Maybe we should opt out of this economy? Maybe we should do other things to entertain ourselves?

lordleft 2y ago
I've started reading a great deal more. I'm tired of wrangling with my entertainment.
- selykg 2y ago
  I started reading a great deal more at the start of the pandemic. I've kept it going since and it has been a real boon. I also switched back to physical books because I actually own them..
ajsnigrutin 2y ago
The problem is, that there is no alternative yet for that. Movies are not an issue, there's piracy, music is not an issue, there's piracy, books are not an issue, there are libraries... and piracy, but youtube is still limited, and the only way to avoid the ads is to buy another device (computer), thus turning pretty much any smarttv (with features you paid for) into a dumb display (that you mostly cannot even buy anymore).
- timcobb 2y ago
  Alternatives: - Not consuming exploitative entertainment - "Piracy"
- alistairSH 2y ago
  Piracy isn't an alternative - it's illegal/immoral. But, the good news is there are two alternatives for all of the above... pay for the content. Or, don't consume the content.
  - ajsnigrutin 2y ago
    Piracy offers the best service there is. You used to be able to buy DVDs, vhs tapes, etc., and you'd get the media, and even then you had to sometimes fast forward through ads. Now, it's impossible to buy media in many cases, even if you click "buy", it might be gone after a month, because some contract somewhere expires, there are ads even in paid plans, there are limits, to what I can do with that media, and more and more services require you to continue paying for content you already "bought". When they fix the "buy" button to actually mean "buy", and when they remove ads from "no ads" plans, i might reconsider. Until then, they're not getting any of my money anyway, piracy or not.
    - h4ck_th3_pl4n3t 2y ago
      > When they fix the "buy" button to actually mean "buy", and when they remove ads from "no ads" plans, i might reconsider. Until then, they're not getting any of my money anyway, piracy or not. This pretty much sums it up for me. I lost so much money over the years for so much content I technically should still "own access to". And not just media, games and books, too. It's so ridiculous how important things like anna's archive have become because otherwise science would be so crippled that it wouldn't even function anymore.
  - timcobb 2y ago
    "Piracy" of digital goods is an oxymoron... I don't think it's immoral. If you pay publishers, the creators don't get paid. And about the legality, well, just ask Meta what they think about torrenting. EDITED for tone.
    - timcobb 2y ago
      I should have included: --- Meta, however, is hoping to convince the court that torrenting is not in and of itself illegal, but is, rather, a "widely-used protocol to download large files." According to Meta, the decision to download the pirated books dataset from pirate libraries like LibGen and Z-Library was simply a move to access "data from a 'well-known online repository' that was publicly available via torrents." To defend its torrenting, Meta has basically scrubbed the word "pirate" from the characterization of its activity. The company alleges that authors can't claim that Meta gained unauthorized access to their data under CDAFA. Instead, all they can claim is that "Meta allegedly accessed and downloaded datasets that Plaintiffs did not create, containing the text of published books that anyone can read in a public library, from public websites Plaintiffs do not operate or own." While Meta may claim there's no evidence of seeding, there is some testimony that might be compelling to the court. Previously, a Meta executive in charge of project management, Michael Clark, had testified that Meta allegedly modified torrenting settings "so that the smallest amount of seeding possible could occur," which seems to support authors' claims that some seeding occurred. And an internal message from Meta researcher Frank Zhang appeared to show that Meta allegedly tried to conceal the seeding by not using Facebook servers while downloading the dataset to "avoid" the "risk" of anyone "tracing back the seeder/downloader" from Facebook servers. Once this information came to light, authors asked the court for a chance to depose Meta executives again, alleging that new facts "contradict prior deposition testimony."
- sumeno 2y ago
  > but youtube is still limited, and the only way to avoid the ads is to buy another device (computer) YouTube premium is cheaper than another computer and works on all devices.
  - x187463 2y ago
    It's crazy how that option completely evades many people's reasoning on the subject.
  - ajsnigrutin 2y ago
    But you still get in-video ads ("this video is sponsored by shadow raid vpn"), that (on a computer) you can skip with sponsorblock.
- acdha 2y ago
  The alternative is paying for things you like so the people who make them can continue doing so. If you don’t think YouTube is worth paying for, it might be a good idea to reconsider the amount of time you spend on it or whether you want to help promote it.
- JKCalhoun 2y ago
  I like the download-YT-content-locally then play. A project hit the front page recently that used yt-dlp to more or less do this.
wat10000 2y ago
I realize it’s anathema to a lot of people, but you could just... pay for stuff. YouTube has an ad-free premium option.
- noja 2y ago
  It's not that simple. It's common enough now to classify some ads as.... not adverts. So even if you pay for no ads, you get ads.
  - kittoes 2y ago
    Completely untrue in the case of YouTube Premium. I literally haven't seen an ad for over a decade now.
- fzeroracer 2y ago
  I think most people don't have a problem paying for something that gives proper added value. But what's happening is that companies are degrading the basic experience and expecting people to either be OK with it (like Roku's increasingly intrusive ad experience) or to pay up to avoid it (like with YouTube).
  - x187463 2y ago
    Perhaps on review of specific ad presentation practices, you could argue for a degradation of experience, but showing adds more or less within YouTube to free users seems like an acceptable method of generating revenue. As an aside, the fact that people pay for cable and still have 4-7 minute ad-breaks every 15 minutes make anything YouTube does pale in comparison.
    - godshatter 2y ago
      Except for the tracking that ads use and the possibility of getting malware because they aren't curated as well as they should be. I also don't like companies aggressively trying to get me to buy stuff I don't want. Show a static image on the right somewhere with a link. Hell, show a dozen of them. Still less intrusive than an ad that shows up while you're in the middle of a video. But the poor ad companies are apparently on the brink of bankruptcy based on how hard they are pushing things. Just a little bit of composure or any respect for the people that they are pushing these on and I'd have a different viewpoint. But they are always all-in on this.
BoredPositron 2y ago
Choice is a luxury for most.
cookiengineer 2y ago
I can recommend "minitube" [1]. It's super minimalistic, and requires you to actively search for things to find them. No ads, no feeds, no short videos, nothing - just playlists for search terms. Uses yt-dlp and mpv behind the scenes, so it's using less than 5% CPU on my small Intel NUC machine, too. I can't stress enough how it is soooo much better in terms of what type of content I consume now. Mr-Beast-cutting-style dumb videos ain't stand a chance to get my attention now. Ironically, the author built it to be a children-safe environment to consume YouTube. [1] https://flavio.tordini.org/minitube https://flavio.tordini.org/minitube
FuriouslyAdrift 2y ago
I've gone back to pirating everything. I can afford to pay for all the services, it's just the service and content quality has gotten so bad that it's just not worth it. I DO pay for content from other markets (French, Israeli, and Japanese), just not mine. It's just like vehicles. There isn't a single vehicle sold in my market that I would pay anything for (ok, maybe the Ford Maverick). There's a bunch in other markets (Europe, South America, Asia), just not mine.
- timmg 2y ago
  > I've gone back to pirating everything. I can afford to pay for all the services, it's just the service and content quality has gotten so bad that it's just not worth it. If the content is so bad, then why the need to pirate it?
  - JKCalhoun 2y ago
    OP said content quality so I'm assuming the streaming is shittier quality than, for example, BluRay quality you might get from torrenting.
  - FuriouslyAdrift 2y ago
    I stick to old stuf from the 1930s to 1990s I will say the Criterion Channel is excellent and I do subscribe to them.
    - timcobb 2y ago
      Are you me before kids?
flanked-evergl 2y ago
Have fun!

lordleft 2y ago

I've started reading a great deal more. I'm tired of wrangling with my entertainment.

selykg 2y ago
I started reading a great deal more at the start of the pandemic. I've kept it going since and it has been a real boon. I also switched back to physical books because I actually own them..

ajsnigrutin 2y ago

The problem is, that there is no alternative yet for that. Movies are not an issue, there's piracy, music is not an issue, there's piracy, books are not an issue, there are libraries... and piracy, but youtube is still limited, and the only way to avoid the ads is to buy another device (computer), thus turning pretty much any smarttv (with features you paid for) into a dumb display (that you mostly cannot even buy anymore).

timcobb 2y ago
Alternatives: - Not consuming exploitative entertainment - "Piracy"
alistairSH 2y ago
Piracy isn't an alternative - it's illegal/immoral. But, the good news is there are two alternatives for all of the above... pay for the content. Or, don't consume the content.
- ajsnigrutin 2y ago
  Piracy offers the best service there is. You used to be able to buy DVDs, vhs tapes, etc., and you'd get the media, and even then you had to sometimes fast forward through ads. Now, it's impossible to buy media in many cases, even if you click "buy", it might be gone after a month, because some contract somewhere expires, there are ads even in paid plans, there are limits, to what I can do with that media, and more and more services require you to continue paying for content you already "bought". When they fix the "buy" button to actually mean "buy", and when they remove ads from "no ads" plans, i might reconsider. Until then, they're not getting any of my money anyway, piracy or not.
  - h4ck_th3_pl4n3t 2y ago
    > When they fix the "buy" button to actually mean "buy", and when they remove ads from "no ads" plans, i might reconsider. Until then, they're not getting any of my money anyway, piracy or not. This pretty much sums it up for me. I lost so much money over the years for so much content I technically should still "own access to". And not just media, games and books, too. It's so ridiculous how important things like anna's archive have become because otherwise science would be so crippled that it wouldn't even function anymore.
- timcobb 2y ago
  "Piracy" of digital goods is an oxymoron... I don't think it's immoral. If you pay publishers, the creators don't get paid. And about the legality, well, just ask Meta what they think about torrenting. EDITED for tone.
  - timcobb 2y ago
    I should have included: --- Meta, however, is hoping to convince the court that torrenting is not in and of itself illegal, but is, rather, a "widely-used protocol to download large files." According to Meta, the decision to download the pirated books dataset from pirate libraries like LibGen and Z-Library was simply a move to access "data from a 'well-known online repository' that was publicly available via torrents." To defend its torrenting, Meta has basically scrubbed the word "pirate" from the characterization of its activity. The company alleges that authors can't claim that Meta gained unauthorized access to their data under CDAFA. Instead, all they can claim is that "Meta allegedly accessed and downloaded datasets that Plaintiffs did not create, containing the text of published books that anyone can read in a public library, from public websites Plaintiffs do not operate or own." While Meta may claim there's no evidence of seeding, there is some testimony that might be compelling to the court. Previously, a Meta executive in charge of project management, Michael Clark, had testified that Meta allegedly modified torrenting settings "so that the smallest amount of seeding possible could occur," which seems to support authors' claims that some seeding occurred. And an internal message from Meta researcher Frank Zhang appeared to show that Meta allegedly tried to conceal the seeding by not using Facebook servers while downloading the dataset to "avoid" the "risk" of anyone "tracing back the seeder/downloader" from Facebook servers. Once this information came to light, authors asked the court for a chance to depose Meta executives again, alleging that new facts "contradict prior deposition testimony."
sumeno 2y ago
> but youtube is still limited, and the only way to avoid the ads is to buy another device (computer) YouTube premium is cheaper than another computer and works on all devices.
- x187463 2y ago
  It's crazy how that option completely evades many people's reasoning on the subject.
- ajsnigrutin 2y ago
  But you still get in-video ads ("this video is sponsored by shadow raid vpn"), that (on a computer) you can skip with sponsorblock.
acdha 2y ago
The alternative is paying for things you like so the people who make them can continue doing so. If you don’t think YouTube is worth paying for, it might be a good idea to reconsider the amount of time you spend on it or whether you want to help promote it.
JKCalhoun 2y ago
I like the download-YT-content-locally then play. A project hit the front page recently that used yt-dlp to more or less do this.

wat10000 2y ago

I realize it’s anathema to a lot of people, but you could just... pay for stuff. YouTube has an ad-free premium option.

noja 2y ago
It's not that simple. It's common enough now to classify some ads as.... not adverts. So even if you pay for no ads, you get ads.
- kittoes 2y ago
  Completely untrue in the case of YouTube Premium. I literally haven't seen an ad for over a decade now.
fzeroracer 2y ago
I think most people don't have a problem paying for something that gives proper added value. But what's happening is that companies are degrading the basic experience and expecting people to either be OK with it (like Roku's increasingly intrusive ad experience) or to pay up to avoid it (like with YouTube).
- x187463 2y ago
  Perhaps on review of specific ad presentation practices, you could argue for a degradation of experience, but showing adds more or less within YouTube to free users seems like an acceptable method of generating revenue. As an aside, the fact that people pay for cable and still have 4-7 minute ad-breaks every 15 minutes make anything YouTube does pale in comparison.
  - godshatter 2y ago
    Except for the tracking that ads use and the possibility of getting malware because they aren't curated as well as they should be. I also don't like companies aggressively trying to get me to buy stuff I don't want. Show a static image on the right somewhere with a link. Hell, show a dozen of them. Still less intrusive than an ad that shows up while you're in the middle of a video. But the poor ad companies are apparently on the brink of bankruptcy based on how hard they are pushing things. Just a little bit of composure or any respect for the people that they are pushing these on and I'd have a different viewpoint. But they are always all-in on this.

BoredPositron 2y ago

Choice is a luxury for most.

cookiengineer 2y ago

I can recommend "minitube" [1]. It's super minimalistic, and requires you to actively search for things to find them. No ads, no feeds, no short videos, nothing - just playlists for search terms. Uses yt-dlp and mpv behind the scenes, so it's using less than 5% CPU on my small Intel NUC machine, too. I can't stress enough how it is soooo much better in terms of what type of content I consume now. Mr-Beast-cutting-style dumb videos ain't stand a chance to get my attention now. Ironically, the author built it to be a children-safe environment to consume YouTube. [1] https://flavio.tordini.org/minitube https://flavio.tordini.org/minitube

FuriouslyAdrift 2y ago

I've gone back to pirating everything. I can afford to pay for all the services, it's just the service and content quality has gotten so bad that it's just not worth it. I DO pay for content from other markets (French, Israeli, and Japanese), just not mine. It's just like vehicles. There isn't a single vehicle sold in my market that I would pay anything for (ok, maybe the Ford Maverick). There's a bunch in other markets (Europe, South America, Asia), just not mine.

timmg 2y ago
> I've gone back to pirating everything. I can afford to pay for all the services, it's just the service and content quality has gotten so bad that it's just not worth it. If the content is so bad, then why the need to pirate it?
- JKCalhoun 2y ago
  OP said content quality so I'm assuming the streaming is shittier quality than, for example, BluRay quality you might get from torrenting.
- FuriouslyAdrift 2y ago
  I stick to old stuf from the 1930s to 1990s I will say the Criterion Channel is excellent and I do subscribe to them.
  - timcobb 2y ago
    Are you me before kids?

flanked-evergl 2y ago

Have fun!