No.4496
>>4495Youtube has had a monopoly on English-language videos for too long, even long before ID verification and payment processor deplatforming. There needs to be alternatives that aren't either full of political schizos like Bitchute, ancient like Dailymotion/Vimeo, or for low-IQ normalfags with the attention span of goldfish like Tiktok.
No.4497
The whole push for verification just in general worries me a lot, I've never experienced escalation on a scale this big before and especially not in regards to the internet. Though, as I've already said on another board, perhaps that's actually the lucky part, seeing as the speed of things at least seems to have alerted all sorts of people in just a few days.
I do wonder if this might just lead to a resurgence of the "old internet" if the more savvy people move over to Tor or I2P and focus on authentic, uncensored user-created hobbyist content again, rather than bowing down to a handful of companies for the sake of fame and monetization.
>>4496I agree with this. Assuming the general web won't get even more unbrowseable, it would be nice to have more options. I've heard some people mention Odysee in recent times, but I've yet to properly explore it to know where that one fits in.
No.4499
peertube
No.4500
Abandon ship. I no longer troll people on youtube comments. Instead I bought motorcycle. Now I troll police on a nightly basis while eurobeat is jumped directly to my ears to make me drive faster. Society doesn't respect us so why should we respect it?
I look forward to the Mad Max future. Embrace it.
No.4501
>>4500godspeed anonymous
literally, I don't want them to catch you
No.4502
>>4500keep fighting the good fight
I wish I didn't have inhibitions and could raise hell like that and not care
No.4503
I feel like all Western nations are preparing for war and that this is a start.
No.4505
I thought you all loved the idea of restricting social media and pornography access to adults.
No.4508
>>4504Make an imageboard but for videos and really shit videos eventually get bumped off. Then it's up to 3rd party archivers to store it.
No.4510
>>4500Fucker are you one of those niggers that go with a modded exhaust to make as much noise as possible 4 in the morning?!
No.4511
>>4497>I do wonder if this might just lead to a resurgence of the "old internet" if the more savvy people move over to Tor or I2P and focus on authentic, uncensored user-created hobbyist content againI know I wouldn't move over until more of my favorite non-backed up web content is scrubbed and/or I'd have to face the blocks and ID verifications myself. And then again, I'd be only motivated to use niconico and YouTube alt frontends until everything gets worse and I'll just clam up and try creating content just for myself, without publishing it except maybe to some obscure place (can't wait!).
People like to idolize closed curated communities, but I really had enough of community cultures being at least 75% implicit gatekeeping and gatekeeping-centered implicit consensus signaling, I really got used to the possibility of being a non-committal, no human-perception-trace user where the inherent insignificance and depersonalization within the nature of appearing to systems and other people is a better anonymizer than the reliance that, in the more personalized environment, some people who could try doxxing you won't get into some stuck-up obsessive schizophrenic moods to try scraping the breadcrumbs over years, for no reason or for reason like they felt I didn't do the consensus signaling hard enough (social meatspace brain cancer type).
Know the onion model layers of defense? Big tech algos have you at being passively exposed and detected, closed networks
(even as a broad social term - from Discord to IRC) have you deeper at being actively targeted and engaged with.
Those are my experiences and impressions.
>>4496>There needs to be alternatives that aren't either full of political schizos like Bitchute, ancient like Dailymotion/Vimeo, or for low-IQ normalfags with the attention span of goldfish like Tiktok.Feels like the alternatives that will spring up first will be:
State-specific
1. CCP Chinese
2. Something with verified and more direct Mossad connections
3. Same old Rutube but with mass migrations to it. Suddenly it becomes more restrictive on content than YouTube
Until something breaks the predictable patterns by blowing up on TikTok and Xitter due to algo anomalies.
No.4512
>>4510Everyone modifies their exhaust because under the current dumb EPA laws you're required to ride around with 50 pounds of unneeded crap under and behind the bike for no reason. The first thing everyone does is drop $200+ into either a slip-on exhaust to get rid of the ugly huge crappy stock exhaust that only exists to skirt by the dumb regulations everyone ignores anyway. The only people that profit off them is the state and they know it's total BS.
That aside: Loud pipes save lives. The most deadly thing about riding my bikes isn't the fact they can do 80mph in first gear or when I decide to be dumb and lean hard into the other lane during left hand turns hoping there is no on-coming traffic. The most deadly thing is the idiots on their cell phones not paying attention to where they are going and not looking before cross the road. I have to watch the front wheels of every car I pass at intersections because some idiot rolling out in front of me could end my life. Where they'll just end up with a dented fender. Even my trucks are no longer safe because of all these rolling tanks called SUVs and crossover that are somehow twice the size of my full sized 1974 truck being driven by people that couldn't pass a proper driving test.
Yes I am that asshole. Everything I own that's street legal has straight pipes or modified exhaust systems. I intentionally drive stuff 15+ years old that's "grandfathered" under state law so I can knock out the cats and gut the stupid sensors. Which cost $200+ a pop and always die for no reason. The best car I ever owned was taken off the road for no reason other than it couldn't pass emissions because it burned a little oil after giving me 500+k miles of excellent service. I couldn't drive it but every asshole with a loan could jump behind the wheel of a rolling tank to ferry their children back and forth to school. Madness.
My business is building roaring rolling monsters. Sorry. We don't feel bad about it considering we were here first. I don't understand why people that hate cars move to a place with a 100+ year car and racing culture. Like the idiots that moved right next to our race track and have the gal to call the police because we're loud for 6 hours out of a week. Maybe visit the land you're buying before you buy it next time.
Trust me you aren't going to hear me for long so why even bother getting angry about it. It isn't like people are doing laps around your neighborhood. If they are you probably should have spent more time scouting out where you were going to put your home before you built it next to a natural race track. There is more than enough room for everyone. If you hate cars go live somewhere that doesn't require owning one. I know such places exist because I lived in one of those places for many years.
No.4513
>>4512Don't get me wrong if you have some idiot revving his engine at all hours of the night he's an asshole and you have the right to complain about it. I don't like it either. But I live next to a multi-mile straight and people from all over come here late at night to see what their bike/car/whatever can do. Some even bring out proper drag racing and circuit racing cars. They're loud and some of them even shake my house so much it sounds like it's going to come off the foundation. I don't complain about it because there is nothing I can do about it anyway. Even the law men fly by here at 150+ mph when I know for a fact they aren't on-call. I don't worry about things I can't control.
It's a self correcting problem. Such people are either mostly responsible and only do it now and again. Or they're irresponsible and won't be a problem much longer anyway. Let them have their fun.
I don't understand why people get so angry when bikes fly by them with loud exhaust systems on the interstate. The exhaust is the only thing we have going for us as far as getting anyone's attention. They cruise faster than cars and split traffic because it's safer for them than trying to go with the cars/trucks. You can not trust any 4 wheeler on the road. The people riding bikes and the guys driving tractor trailers hate them equally and for good reasons. People in 4 wheelers don't pay attention to their surroundings and it's very rare to see one that actually knows how to drive in traffic. As such we all drive defensively and try to stay as far away from them as possible and we run loud exhaust to be noticed.
Well all that and the fact that for a few hundred dollars you can wake up any bike easily. One ECU flash plus exhaust modification (or full cat delete) and you're pulling a bunch more power out of the same engine for little cost. Most of them aren't even really being assholes either. Most of them are running baffles. Since they don't want hearing damage and don't want to piss off their neighbors by simply idling it in the garage.
There used to be a lot of little things other people did on the road that would send me into a rage. Now I don't care about them. If they're driving aggressive let them go on. If they're loud let them go on ahead. If they want to cut the line let them. I try to stay as far away from other people as possible. Which is why I only drive aggressively myself late at night usually on weekdays when there are few if any people on the roads. I typically go way back in the sticks as well since the roads back there are more interesting. It cost too much to do track days every week I can't afford it. I'm a poor man addicted to a rich man's sport.
No.4514
>>4513>You can not trust any 4 wheeler on the road. true and I'm not going to trust any 2 wheeler either.
when it becomes safer around any vehicle operator when you assume the operator is out there to get you at least in plausible deniability style, and your adaptation to this increases your survival chances, it's time to ask a lot questions
No.4517
>>4516 ontopic sager
How the hell they expect to protect the chilluns more than parents et al. with parental control over the devices can, in the first place? They should just fine the parents if their kids are not having parent control restrictions. Now that'd be actually to the point.
No.4519
Please if you don't already, download and setup
https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp. You can find a list of commands on that page but here's one I use typically
https://files.catbox.moe/l4fjkx.txt. Download your favorite things or anything that is worth archiving. You're also going to want to extract your Youtube cookies as some videos will require it in order to download due to age restriction nonsense, just put it in the same folder as yt-dlp.
No.4520
I use a program called mediadownloader but it's still just a workaround for how often it is frustrated by a video being restricted.
No.4524
I suspect this AI verification shit is just them openly admitting the sheer amount of tracking they've been doing to anyone on their service (and it being fully out in the open, they can now make public policy changes based on it).
>>4519I am constantly vindicated in having been downloading nearly everything I watch for the last few years.
Not all of it is in HD because I don't have infinite space, but fuck man, I have my own half-terabyte slice of YouTube after several years (well, some of this folder has some old anime I threw in, so let's say 400GB is from YouTube).
99% of shit can be saved in 480p or less, and the rest I save with as high of a quality as I need.
No.4525
I will say this: I'm glad that pretty much everyone thinks this is a bad thing. I we haven't seen this kind of internet-wide solidarity since I wanna say SOPA/PIPA.
No.4528
>>4504>The amount of waste is absurd.>I'd love to see alternatives pop up, but all that data... how do you even handle it.You're completely right, but it does stink that the notion of "Broadcast Yourself", with no intent of trying to make Youtube your job is long since dead. Or rather, anyone who uploads without trying to make money gets little to no promotion from current Youtube since it offers only costs to their platform from their point of view. It makes the whole platform feel very samey to me though. The day small channels get run off completely just gets nearer and nearer. Maybe it'll be under the guise of protecting kids
>>4525>we haven't seen this kind of internet-wide solidarity since I wanna say SOPA/PIPA.That's a throwback. I'm inclined to agree
No.4553
If anyone is running a NAS or a home server,
Pinchflat lets you automatically download and archive whole channels and playlists; automatically embedding descriptions, subtitles, thumbnails, everything except comments. It also spaces out the rate at which it downloads videos so google doesn't put you in a gay baby jail timeout ban. It's really just yt-dlp with a fat user interface and preconfigured to do what you'd want for archiving channels so not really a necessity but its pretty convenient, especially if you already have a server running.
Its not designed to do single unlisted random videos though, you can make a playlist of your own for a miscellaneous archive. If you don't have an account then it's simpler to just use yt-dlp's function that reads URLs from txt files, thats what I did before i found out about pinchflat
No.4561
>>4496Youtube is genuine trash in 2025. Everything is centered around monetization. Every guy who makes a single video already has a patreon and sponsorships ready. All videos are done for ad money and the soulness shows. High "production value", but nothing interesting to say. The only few decent people are oldfags from the old days who are still around, otherwise I actually can't find anything to watch. An algorithm that like all others makes ragebait the norm. A search that does not work because the algorithm decides what you see.
All I want is for this garbage site to fucking die already so japan can start using niconico again. I don't care if it's tiktok that does it. Hell, I'll take bilibili hegemony at this point. Bilibili is trying to expand internationally in SEA.
No.4562
>>4508That sounds like a nightmare
A moderately fast imageboard will inevitably select for memetic power. Not value, not quality, not creativity. Survival of the fittest. What will be repeated and propagated? hence why the fastest board on the hell site is the one that spread the most to the rest of the internet, and other fast ones like /v/ are also what they are. I udnerstand you aren't doing a serious proposal but imageboards aren't a one stop solution to everything. They have their specific uses and problems. What you'd be doing is replicating ragebait algorithms naturally.
No.4564
>>4562>Survival of the fittest.It's always the rule of any place. Just that one's fittest is another's maladaptation.
Hence why kissu is not like mainstream message boards and vice versa.
NTA, just ranting on very important pedantics
No.4566
>>4564That is the universal law. But you can either choose to align the selection towards human ends, or towards something alien. The imageboard solution aligns it towards "being repeated" first and foremost, pure memetic power. Is this desirable? I'm actually of the opinion that the decline on the hell site was inevitable from the start because of this. This is a fundamental design flaw that shows itself once you get enough users such that the pressure is too high.
No.4567
>>4566Continuing, there is of course a second order selection happening outside of the artificially made platform's, themselves, between them. The best example - almost a science experiment - is how last year bluesky was beaten out by twitter despite bluesky being an objectively better platform mechanically which respects the user. Twitter rewards ragebait which keeps the eyeballs in. Meanwhile bluesky barely has an algorithm. Survival of the fittest shows itself. Then you can see a third order selection between nations perhaps. Chinese social media doesn't reward ragebait to the same extent (political topics are supressed in the algorithm rather than boosted for instance). Could it be that that is more sustainable in the long term? Or is the virality just too strong?
No.4569
>>4567>The best example - almost a science experiment - is how last year bluesky was beaten out by twitterBluesky has tens of millions of users; I'd scarcely call that "beaten out". Sure Twitter has
more users, but that's because it had a 20 year head-start.
>Survival of the fittest shows itself.Social media is not a zero-sum game. You can sign up for as many services as you want. The only thing preventing people from doing so is laziness.
No.4571
>>4569>Social media is not a zero-sum game.Are you sure? "Attention economy" is a common term, is it not?. Free time is not an unlimited resource. Technically you can sign up all you want but if someone is spending hours watching tiktoks they are probably not also spending hours on youtube. There is a reason algorithms deprioritize posts with links. There is a reason every social media "app" goes through crabification into the tiktok-twitter hybrid monstrosity to keep you from going to the
other one. The whole thing is predictably very centered on capturing as much attention and time as possible to serve more ads or political goals(twitter). You say it's because of laziness and yeah I agree, normalfags are the way they are, but that's not really the argument though.
>Bluesky has tens of millions of users; I'd scarcely call that "beaten out". Sure Twitter has more users, but that's because it had a 20 year head-start.Sure. By beaten out I mean it didn't dethrone even though there was that moment where it seemed it might. Now it's been stagnated at 30mil zone for months. I use bluesky myself, the japanese userbase is pretty big. A weak algorithm means soft isolation of the japanese cluster from the rest, the way it's supposed to be.
No.4573
Ragebait algos are a race to the bottom. You can't defeat them by simply making a wholesome platform that doesn't have them because natural selection will wipe you out, that is the entire reason they exist in the first place, to keep people engaged. You cannot win a fight where you are willingly disarming. The only way to defeat them is to enforce cooperation between actors. Realistically this happens through the government regulating these practices like the chinese cyberspace security law, whether you think it's good or bad. In the west it's a free for all though.
No.4574
>>4569>You can sign up for as many services as you want.but you can't post on all of them at the same time, nor does activity in one platform automatically benefit other platforms
>lazinesstarded thought terminating cliche, how can they be lazy about browsing the internet if people are spending more time online than ever before? does it not make it even more obvious that the tendency is for a few places to hog the spotlight?
No.4578
>>4553I've been meaning to set up something like this for a long time. Do you know if there's a front-end for serving videos downloaded via something like this?
I'm going to need more storage...
No.4582
>>4578Pinchflat has settings to set the videos up in a way that you can use them out the box with kodi or jellyfin or plex or whatever.
i actually kinda forgot that I already had jellyfin set up but now i actually get to use it since i rewatch some videos weirdly often
looking at the channels i want to back up i'm also wondering if i should get a whole NAS setup rather than just a doinky raspberry pi since it doesn't have enough power (or ports) to handle several drives. i got fucked over because i think i ordered a pi 5 (for more performance) the same week this shit started getting ugly
No.4584
>>4571>A weak algorithm means soft isolation of the japanese cluster from the restI despise Twitter for how strongly you have to groom and curate your feeds and datamined profile of interests for an acc to arrive at "clusters" of interest in your feed. Feels like not as little as a like press, but even not instantly scrolling through something ambiguously politics related will get you into a closed loop of garbage you didn't come for.
>>4571A popular social media system is inherently one-sided by being competitively focused on filling a niche as a brand/symbol/etc -> it monopolizes attention of its user as far as possible -> the user's mind becomes shaped by whatever hooked loop system the social media is.
There's a significant reason why stereotypes of 4chan (economically different, cybernetically the same)/TikTok/Twitter/LinkedIn/Tumblr/Reddit/Facebook users exist, but there aren't such for YouTube
(stopped being merely a video hosting service a long time ago, it's like TikTok but with a few layer crusts of history and depth)/BlueSky/Mastodon/MiiVerse/Steam Community/Google's Blogger users.
Not going to include Substack and Medium into the latter because I heavily feel the stereotypes are "grifters" and "impressionable idiot grifters" respectively.There isn't a proper holistic "fix" to any of this other than minding own business or finding a low effort way to significantly accelerate the inevitable tumorfication of the stereotype environment generators so much that their black box implodes into something unusable by human users
(its only source of nourishment. Just because 99% is an Ouroboros bots and algos doesn't mean it isn't powered by the presence, data, and money that people represent) and something else takes over, whether to implode, too, or to stay better for longer.
Any other "fixes" only detract from rerolling for the transient unpredictable best ASAP. That is what a social media is.
No.4585
we should have id verification on kissu, everyone should prove their age by posting both sides of their credit card
No.4587
>>4585I volunteer to safely store this information and verify every post. Please send picture of your photo ID and $2 for processing fees. You will also need to schedule appointment with me to verify it's really the same person pictured in the ID. Make sure to have both your web cam and microphone on when you join the private verification channel. Anon should also plan to dress in seifuku and have lotion handy.
No.4588
>>4585Either this or crossdressing photos with timestamp!
No.4589
>>4588Please put on seifuku to verify.
Failure!
Pinafore is not an acceptable clothing option for verification. Please try again.
No.4642
I figured out a major change in youtube's system since about a week ago. I have a burner account I've been using for a few years now. Last week I noticed it was giving me suggestions based on stuff I haven't watched in years and never watched on this account. My burner account was shadow banned completely site wide and I can no longer post real comments. I can post comments and they will appear for me but no one else can see them. Which was easy enough to verify from another computer/IP address as both a guest and logged into another account.
I got curious and logged into several other youtube accounts I have. Some of which are just old gmail accounts that I rarely use. All of them are shadow banned now too and give the same suggestions as the burner account.
What they've done in preparation for this stupid Real ID system is taken my 25+ gmail accounts and merged them together. So now I can no longer maintain separate accounts for separate activities. They've all been linked together and only function as different screen names for the same account. Obviously, most were easy enough for them to verify belonged to me due to being linked to the same emails/cell phone number for verification purposes. Since they forced me to do that for the last several years to retain access to them. But others that I was really careful not to cross link with those accounts got caught up in this merge as well. Probably through a combination of browser finger printing+IP address history.
Last week I was also locked out of three different gmail accounts I've had for over 10 years that were carefully kept away from my main batch. They were never accessed from the same hardware and I made damn sure not to hand over a cell phone number or use a recovery email that was linked to the above accounts. All of them locked me out for the same reason: No real name/identity. One I managed to recover through automated support by saying it was a parody account. It unlocked and gave me access for a couple of days. But then it was locked/banned again with no way to recover it.
Be aware they're cracking down hard. Today I'm moving anything linked to these accounts over to my own self hosted email+domain. That way I don't lose access to some 20+ year old accounts I maintain on some websites. But self hosting email isn't a long term solution. Keeping my domain out of the naughty/anti-spam lists for major providers as been really hard. Despite owning the domain since the 90s and never doing anything bad with it they keep putting it on the list all the major providers use claiming it's "untrusted". Emails I send often times don't even make it to the other person's spam folder. They just get dropped. But so far emails coming to me aren't being dropped yet. So at least it can still function well enough to get one-time codes and mailing list updates.
My hope is this will usher in a new era of piracy and people wills start sharing youtube videos like they do TV shows, movies and anime on the various warez networks. But most likely this won't happen. Considering how inept as technology the up and coming generation is and how lazy the older ones have gotten. So I'm expecting not to have access to youtube at all by this time next year. I've already been living with that for all other major social networking sites because I refuse to create accounts for them. The "alt" versions of those sites don't allow you to read comments without logging in either. So there is almost nothing left to lurk outside of the few imageboards I still come to.
No.4643
>>4642While I'm ranting about it. Another major thing they did a few days back is break yt-dlp if you've fed it a cookie. Many videos will no longer allow you to pull down anything but 360p versions of the video. There is a fix for this already if you follow the git but it hasn't trickled down to the repo I follow yet (I'm not introducing unstable yt-dlp into my system. I follow my OS's packages because of patches to improve security).
I suspect we'll see big attempts to break yt-dlp and similar applications over the next several months. They've really been breaking everything left and right ahead of this ID/age verification change in policy. They seem to be attempting to close all loopholes for leeching their content.
It's probably no great loss. I really dislike youtube and clones of youtube. I wish people had enough sense to share content like they did in the old days where they'd put up the file and people would share it around forums/IMs/IRC etc. But I know it isn't going to happen because a lot of these "content creators" are only in it for attention whoring and ad money. Can't do either of those if you share content like people did it in the old days. Modern life is pretty depressing.
Archive what you care about while you still can.
No.4654
>>4643>They seem to be attempting to close all loopholes for leeching their content.if it gets bad enough, I'll resort to recording videos with fucking OBS if I have to
No.4655
>>4654Thanks to built-in DRM in the latest Linux kernel and browser engines this will not work.
No.4656
Does anyone know if simply changing your YT name is enough to make it impossible for your subscribers to figure out your previous identity when they get a new upload notification? Provided they don't remember the account creation date and everything else in the profile got changed as well. The only thing I can come up with is researching archives of the original account and comparing the subscriber count and creation date to the new one if you already have a suspicion, though I believe it's possible to request a deletion if you can prove your case.
Not sure if there any other loopholes exclusive to YT.
No.4658
>>4655what the fuck?! how?
No.4659
>>4656I would assume that something like a subscription is tied to an ID behind the scenes. If you want to escape an old identity I think you'd need a new account.
No.4660
>>4658It doesn't just affect Linux but Linux is slowly being turned into a DRM friendly platform like Windows and Mac. The browser requires Widevine to view certain content from places like streaming networks. This only works if the kernel has a DRM module and there is a chain of trust between the GPU and the monitor. It allows encrypted content to be downloaded from the internet, sent over the GPU to a monitor where it's finally decoded. Thus making things like screen capture software and hardware capture cards (or in-line devices like a VCR) from being able to get a copy of the images. If you attempt to take a screenshot or capture it while it's playing all you'll get is a black screen.
The push for things like Wayland is because of similar thinking. It isn't about security and one application not being able to see another in the hopes of keeping you safe. As this provides no real security at all because if someone is already on your system attempting to do that you're pwned anyway. It's 100% about preventing you from being able to do stuff like take screenshots or copies of content being sent to your by these major providers.
For now they haven't totally disabled access for machines that don't have a DRM chain of trust. Right now what they typically go is lock-out 1080p-4k versions of the content if you don't have this stuff either in software or hardware. But they could rug pull the lower quality copies they do send in the clear any time they want.
On the *BSD family of OSs we've been having to run full blown VMs with either Windows or Linux running inside of them to pass these checks for years already. They still break those all of the time because they consider it to be an exploit (host OS can snoop upon VM OS's content). So things like Netflix break all of the time.
The various google devices (phones and chromebooks) actually include a hardware chip for this purpose. Which they regularly deem outdated as the DRM is upgraded thus forcing people to upgrade to continue watching that type of content. My 10-12 year old Android phone can no longer access anything through official channels for example. Not even browser updates. Since the browser is out of date and the chip in the device is too old attempting to stream from places like Netflix no longer works. Youtube doesn't work either because they've gone out of their way to break it on older devices both in the browser and through the old application.
We've been playing a game of cat and mouse for years with these streaming services when it comes to ripping content off of them. Every year it gets a little harder.
No.4661
>>4656You can create sub-channels under and existing account. It has its own followers/subscriptions and everything. I can't remember exactly where you do it but somewhere in youtube studio or under account settings you can create a new channel tied to the same email address.
No.4662
>>4643You just cant afford to be poor with no storage anymore. Can't trust anything online, have to download everything. I've been downloading older videos that I would like to archive, but nothing you can do with the newer ones. Maybe creators will find a way to sell the video in as archives to make more money off of people, which in-turn gets pirated away. I don't like YouTube either but that's where most of the internet's information is posted now-a-days. Lots of lectures and educational videos I'd want to watch when I get the time to, or music videos and stuff I want to save for my own.
Future sucks.
>But I know it isn't going to happen because a lot of these "content creators" are only in it for attention whoring and ad money.I'd like to believe that people who add value to the website (be it some skill or knowledge they share) will support the cause and share, while the "content creators" who won't, don't produce anything of value anyway.
No.4666
>>4659>>4661Thank you! I forgot about the subchannels, that might actually come in handy if you can bypass verification with a main channel that's old enough.
I have to admit the original question actually was unrelated to the issue and I'm mostly trying to find a way to piggyback off of an already established channel "in secret". An internal ID wouldn't be a problem if it's only visible to YT themselves, though I guess my plan is sadly just way too flawed.
No.4733
>>4505oh look, another "but da kiiidddzzz" retard
it's all so tiresome -_-
No.4734
Early this year I made a new gmail+youtube account and linked it to a family member's cell phone number. I needed it so I could set-up email on a new machine. I mostly use it for getting email from a handful of mailing lists and lurking youtube from terminal.
It got hit with the:
>We can't verify you're an adult
Message yesterday. Despite the fact that they know damn well the cell phone is owned by a 80+ year old person. This has screwed up by yt-dlp on that machine and I can no longer watch videos that are age restricted even with the cookie from the browser.
I forgot to take a screenshot of the pop-up and I can't get it to show it again. But basically it tells you they need to verify your age and gives you the following options:
>1) Take picture of your Government ID and send it in to them
>2) Turn on webcam and take picture of your face. (plz feed our AI more data!!!)
>3) Hand over your credit card information.
I'm not giving them any of the above. I'll post updates about this. Since I have 20+ gmail/youtube accounts in various stages of age+verification I should be able to get a good idea about how they're rolling it out. So far it seems they're only doing it with recent accounts created in the last year or two. I was surprised that the first one that got hit was the only one I have verified with a cell phone number. Well I have a few more that are verified with a cell number but it's a number I haven't had access to in years (kind of worried someone will steal those accounts someday or I'll lose access to them).
No.4737
>>4734>2) Turn on webcam and take picture of your face. (plz feed our AI more data!!!)Use garrys mod, I saw someone get past one of these verification steps using gmod by pointing a camera at someone's face and using the face poser tool to change the expression to match the demands
No.4738
>>4737Someone should try the draggable N64 Mario face next
No.4741
>>4737I might try this, thanks. I need to see if my webcam is working anyway. I never use them and the one on my laptop is covered at all times. It came with a slider to block it.
I wonder if I can pay a homeless guy like $10 for this.
No.4742
>>4734>1) Take picture of your Government ID and send it in to themgladly, tho it won't be my own ;)
(use the Tea leak tom your advantage)
No.4743
>>4741>I need to see if my webcam is working anywayNo you dont. Use OBS's virtual webcam
Gmod -> recorded live by OBS -> activate virtual webcam -> select it when the browser asks for camera permissions. Done
No.4775
>>4774It's the cartelization of companies. All of them will agree to be on the same page and rape their consumers equally.
No.4793
>>4742This was a rare treasure trove with perfect timing.
No.4819
>>4774maybe being a homeless schizo in the woods isn't such a bad fate after all if this is the norm for the digital world post 2026-2030 or so
No.4821
>>4660Linux of all things doing that sounds baffling. Isn't it open source? Can't somebody just make a distro that doesn't comply to that gay DRM shit?
>If you attempt to take a screenshot or capture it while it's playing all you'll get is a black screenexamples of this in action?
No.4824
>>4821I'm guessing just like with everything else, "Linux" doesn't have a say in this. It's either comply, or lose the ability to use this monopoly of a platform. A distro that doesn't have a DRM module wouldn't be of much use if the website/browser requires it to function.
Similar to how disabling scripts in browsers is right now; you could disable JavaScript for every website but then you won't be able to use them at all.
The only option is to decrown YouTube as the de facto video sharing website, but that's not possible unless Google collapses.
That's the thing with monopolies, they can do whatever they want and we can but put our heads down and obey.
No.4825
>>4821>Linux of all things doing that sounds baffling.The Linux eco-system has been Microsoft's/Google's/IBM's, Facebook's, and friends whipping boy for the last 15 years or so. It isn't 1999 anymore.
>Isn't it open source?Is malware no longer malware if you have the source code? Consider systemd. Millions of lines of code. Most of it not audited. Now add the kernel and all the drivers that come with it. Most of it not audited. Plenty of the code only exists to allow third part things to hook-in and lock down large portions of userspace. In the name of "security" most of the time.
>Can't somebody just make a distro that doesn't comply to that gay DRM shit?Sure if you don't care about supporting tons of things that interact with some companies cloud service. Or you don't care about running certain software. Like Steam.
Never mind the fact that creating a distro is easy. Hosting it is hard. Maintaining it even harder and costly. You're looking at thousands of dollars a month just to host the packages and everything else required to ship a system people can use without jumping through a lot of hoops.
Most distros don't differ from each other anymore. If they ship systemd they're all the same thing with maybe a different skin for the desktop environment. Maybe the commands for the package manager differ and how they package things. But it's all the same software once it's in /usr/bin. Arch is no different than Fedora at the end of the day.
>examples of this in action?Any modern distro shipping wayland by default without a ton of hacky shit using dbus to make it possible to use print screen key. This is deemed more "secure". You know. Just in case you decided to install some spyware or you gave your web browser full rights to the system instead of running it inside of a condom.
No.4827
>>4821>Can't somebody just make a distro that doesn't comply to that gay DRM shit?all you have to do is run any Wayland exclusive under a single window kiosk compositor (the thing Wayland was designed for in the first place), such as "cage".
Makes redhatters seethe and foam and the mouth, highly recommend
No.4890
>>4885We can defeat youtube relatively easily. All we need is a large botnet and and account for each bot. These are the hard parts.
Next comes the attack. Each bot is to generate a couple gigabytes of random data, place a video header at the beginning, and send it when the machine is idling; then delete the video, and do it again in a few hours.
Such an attack could in theory flood youtube's storage for little to no cost.
The only reason no one has done it yet is because cybercriminals either value that website as a resource to be exploited (spreading viruses, advertising, etc) or view it a worthless and ignore it.
We've yet to see someone attack youtube itself. That could change soon
No.4892
>>4890but if we defeat youtube, we'll all have to migrate to tiktok.
No.4912
>>4892We can defeat it as well; t'is but a small hurdle in our battle for freedom.
No.4913
would anyone be interested in "kissu taba douga", a video and non-archived streaming platform to replace cytube for anime and game nights and feed anti-verniy propaganda to anonymous
No.4914
>>4913>feed [...] anonymousI'm in
No.4942
Interestingly, the best legislation I've seen recently to take a stab at age verification measures has come out of California. I tend to get easily outraged over stuff like this, but it doesn't seem like this bill would be mandating platforms to really do much of anything or imposing measures that'd see sites like this forced to use third party apps for verification. It still does have a bit of funky wording, but for the most part it seems to be just pushing for more awareness and effectiveness for parental controls without necessitating ID verification. Which, if there's anything that I could think of that I'd accept as an alternative course to what we see in other areas, would be that.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/09/13/california-advances-effort-to-check-kids-ages-online-amid-safety-concerns-00563005https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB1043/2025 No.4943
>>4942>Wicks’ bill asks parents to input their kids’ ages when setting up a smartphone, tablet or laptop; groups users into one of four age brackets; and sends their age info to apps like Facebook and Instagram.That does sound more workable and more privacy-friendly than most proposals. I like that it puts the onus on parents, prohibits requesting unnecessary info or sharing it with third parties, and spares anyone old enough to buy their own device the hassle, but it's not clear to me from the wording how it would affect sites accessed through a browser:
>(2) “Covered application store” does not mean an online service or platform that distributes extensions, plug-ins, add-ons, or other software applications that run exclusively within a separate host application.That seems to exempt anything that runs inside a browser, but it doesn't explicitly say "website". Also, if someone develops an app that interacts with non-compliant third party sites (like the various imageboard apps), who is responsible for ensuring the app's compliance? The dev? The app store?
There's also this:
>The bill would require a developer to request a signal with respect to a particular user from an operating system provider or a covered application store when the application is downloaded and launched.It would be less intrusive to require that operating system providers must offer parents a setting to block, allow or manually approve non-compliant apps, and to make explicit that safe harbor protections still apply to non-compliant devs as long as they comply with other laws. Probably also easier to enforce, because:
>This bill would punish noncompliance with a civil penalty to be enforced by the Attorney General, as prescribed.That doesn't resolve "the Ofcom question": are non-compliant devs legally liable if they are in a different jurisdiction, and if so, how is that penalty meant to be enforced? What if the app store is also in a different jurisdiction? (Think of F-Droid, etc.)
No.4944
>>4943California has a fair bit more strength when it comes to this law because it actually has most of the big tech companies housed within it in Silicon Valley. And it's not too intrusive that the big companies would be too opposed to implementing it. I think the onus for implementation is on both the dev and the app store.
No.4950
>>4942This is a very vague and over reaching law, which would require all below to implement age signals:
Linux and other *nix when setting up an account, even local accounts
Anything that is distributed with any kind of package managers (since they are "application stores"), including linux distribution repos and programming language package managers like pip, npm, etc
Any software being distributed by these package managers, and since they package software licensed under free licenses, developers cannot stop them
Anyone who writes software of any kind need to implement age check. Even your text editor will be forced to asking your age.
>>4943>but it's not clear to me from the wording how it would affect sites accessed through a browser:See:
>(c) “Application” means a software application that may be run or directed by a user on a computer, a mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device that can access a covered application store or download an application.A web browser (or anything that can be used to download files, like torrent clients) are within this application scope because it can be used to "download an application".
The developer of the web browser must require the age signal from the operating system provider, thus achieving the purpose of age control. I would expect access to web browsers being restricted since they already have 17+ age requirement in the Apple app store.
> who is responsible for ensuring the app's compliance? The dev? The app store?The dev. It pretty much says the the dev 100% knows about the user age at this point and can't turn a blind eye to it.
No.4951
>>4950It's still better than any of the ID verification laws on the books that all others are trying to implement.
No.4952
>>4892Tiktok is supposed to be controlled by America soon.
They really do not like not having control of the young minds.
No.4956
>>4951>(b) An operating system provider or a covered application store that makes a good faith effort to comply with this title, taking into consideration available technology and any reasonable technical limitations or outages, shall not be liable for an erroneous signal indicating a user’s age range or any conduct by a developer that receives a signal indicating a user’s age range.They have to make a good faith effort taking into consideration available technology, which includes widely known invasive methods like ID check and credit card requirement. Attorney General can argue that more lenient methods are intentionally negligent and not in good faith and they are responsible for intention violation $7,500 per person.
No.4957
>>4950>Linux and other *nix when setting up an account, even local accountsOnly the Linux Foundation is based in California, and the kernel doesn't handle accounts. Even if they were forced to implement an age check somehow, distros developed by organizations outside the state (which is most of them) could just comment out those lines.
>Anything that is distributed with any kind of package managers (since they are "application stores"), including linux distribution repos and programming language package managers like pip, npm, etcMost of those are also managed by organizations outside California, or can be transferred to one if the need arises.
>Any software being distributed by these package managersOnly if the package manager falls within Cali jurisdiction, and even if it does, see above.
>(c) “Application” means a software application that may be run or directed by a user on a computer, a mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device that can access a covered application store or download an application.That would normally include browsers, but see the "Covered application store" exception. If websites fall under the definition of an application (which they logically should, considering HTML+CSS+JS is Turing complete), that would make the browser an application store, but if the browser sandbox counts as running the application "exclusively within a separate host application", that would exempt it under this exception. Torrent clients, download managers etc. might not have the sandbox excuse, but any piracy-adjacent application should already not be managed by an organizer with any exposure to US law if they know what's good for them.
In short: even in the worst case scenario where the geriatrics in charge know what a Linux and a browser is and apply this as draconically as possible, I can't see it changing any user's daily life in any meaningful way.
It could create more short term headaches for developers than the current situation (in that they might need to transfer their organization's legal residence elsewhere), but less than any alternative proposal I've read.
Of course, the ideal solution is just to tell parents "If you care about protecting your kids so much, don't give them unrestricted internet access until they turn 18. If you do, the consequences are on you." This is closer to that ideal than other proposals currently doing the rounds.
No.4958
>>4956>They have to make a good faith effort taking into consideration available technology, which includes widely known invasive methods like ID check and credit card requirement.Looks like the proposal preempts that:
>1798.501. (a) An operating system provider shall do all of the following:> (3) Send only the minimum amount of information necessary to comply with this title and shall not share the digital signal information with a third party for a purpose not required by this title.>(4) A developer that receives a signal pursuant to this title shall use that signal to comply with applicable law but shall not do either of the following:> (A) Request more information from an operating system provider or a covered application store than the minimum amount of information necessary to comply with this title.> (B) Share the signal with a third party for a purpose not required by this title.3 and 4B explicitly prohibit third party ID checks and credit card shenanigans.
No.4961
>>4957>Only the Linux Foundation is based in California,Which means that Linux Foundation is part of the operating system provider (the other part being distro developers), so they are on the hook to comply. It also includes all individual developers who live in California and have ever contributed code to the operating system:
>(g) “Operating system provider” means a person or entity that develops, licenses, or controls the operating system software on a computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device.The distro organization can be outside of California, but as long as the whole system contains code written by developers in California, every single one of the developers are personally responsible, because these developers develop and license operating system code in GPL license.
>and the kernel doesn't handle accountsIt has the concept of users (the human user usually created a user with UID 1000), so it handles accounts.
>Most of those are also managed by organizations outside California, or can be transferred to one if the need arises.>Only if the package manager falls within Cali jurisdiction, and even if it does, see above.See above. All developers living in California are personally responsible.
>Torrent clients, download managers etc. might not have the sandbox excuse, but any piracy-adjacent application should already not be managed by an organizer with any exposure to US law if they know what's good for them.Web browsers are no different. They can download .exe files just like these programs, so they achieve the same functionality.
And pretty much all of the web browsers contain code written by someone or some company in California, so they are all responsible.
In fact, the decentralized nature of free software only magnifies the damage. Instead of Facebook the company getting $7500 fine per person, it's now every single person who ever contributed code getting $7500 fine per person, meaning ever more fines when summing all developers.
>>4958>3 and 4B explicitly prohibit third party ID checks and credit card shenanigans.Wrong.
3 says that operating system provider can only send the minimal signal to the application developers. 4B say that application developers can only request minimal signal and nothing more, and they can't share the signal to third party.
So application developers won't know about the detailed information. HOWEVER, operating system provider will still need to implement "good faith" checks like ID check to make sure they can send correct signals. There is no limitation on the amount or kind of information the operating system provider can collect.
No.4968
>>4961>as long as the whole system contains code written by developers in California, every single one of the developers are personally responsible, because these developers develop and license operating system code in GPL license. That's not how licenses or liability or jurisdictions work.
>In fact, the decentralized nature of free software only magnifies the damage. Instead of Facebook the company getting $7500 fine per person, it's now every single person who ever contributed code getting $7500 fine per person, meaning ever more fines when summing all developers.That's not how ANYTHING in the real world works, ever.
>There is no limitation on the amount or kind of information the operating system provider can collect.The bill only specifies that developers must not ignore clear internal signals that contradict provided signals, and it restricts the signals the OS and apps must exchange to the minimum necessary. Those are very clear limitations. It doesn't mention ID checks. You made that up.
I'll stop replying here, because you're clearly projecting a doomsday scenario you made up in advance onto the text as written.
No.4969
>>4968>That's not how licenses or liability or jurisdictions work.>That's not how ANYTHING in the real world works, ever.Thar's exactly how EVERYTHING in the real world works. See EU Cyber Resilience Act and the debacle it caused on open source developers. In the end they have to lobby to restrict the law so that the open source developers won't be personally responsible.
>Those are very clear limitations.Those are very clear limitations on the exchange of signals. Not limitations on the collection of data necessary to generate correct signal.
>It doesn't mention ID checks. You made that up.It mentions good faith of using existing and reasonable technology for implementation. ID check is one of the existing and reasonable and well known technology. It can be done in other ways like credit card checking, but they cannot be less reliable than ID check to satisfy the good faith requirement, which means all of the alternative methods are equally invasive.
>I'll stop replying here, because you're clearly projecting a doomsday scenario you made up in advance onto the text as written.The scenario is real. Anyone who is in the position of current or future AG can make this happen.
No.4982
I saw my first fully AI slop generated video today, from the voices to the images used, although the topic was factual information from real sources anyways.
Is there still no reliable way to filter out or seek old Youtube videos?
As years pass I am concerned the slop videos will bury real helpful videos made pre-2024 and finding them will literally be like digging mines blindly.
No.4983
>>4982Add "before:year" to your search queries, example: "nigger hate before:2024"
No.4984
>>4982I stopped idly browsing and searching YouTube years ago, so I only ever come across videos when they're linked by posters on the imageboards and cytube channels I frequent, and I only open them (through Invidious) if they look contextually relevant and written by a real human bean.
The downside is that I never discover anything before it goes viral. The upside is that I don't get caught up in viral hype/hate cycles that stop mattering before they percolate through the grapevine.
With that said: even videos that get linked by these posters of culture sometimes default to some janky AI dub track these days. Defenestrate techbros.
No.4985
>>4983Very hot tip with that, thanks anon.
No.4986
>>4985Happy to help! It's also really good for finding actual hobby content from before everyone wanted to be a content creator, or finding stuff you know for sure was uploaded before a certain date.
No.4987
didn't they start doing mandatory AI dubbing over normal videos just now? is that fake news?
No.4989
>>4987I think they did, I opened up a Japanese video and was greeted with generic English AI voice.
No.4990
>>4987You can turn it off per video on PC but as far as I can tell theres no way to change it on mobile without changing your whole account language
No.4996
>>4989>>4990well nevermind, i think i will stop using youtube for quite a while anyway. apparently they've been rolling new JS crap just the other day and yt-dlp will now require a js interpreter or something. It's on their github issue list. It will likely come to the nitter situation with the 0auth thing.
Sometimes i wish youtube would go back to being a 5 minute long video sharing website. I lost the count at how many hours i lost watching people playing games and ramble.
No.5030
As of this morning youtube pushed the initial update that broke yt-dlp and all third party methods of loading videos outside of the two major browser engines. yt-dlp will now require full blown javascript interpreter to work thus all 32-bit systems are now unable to view content from it. Along with most 64-bit archs that aren't ARM/x86-64. This is in preparation of an upcoming update they're going to push soon to require point of origin verification before it'll send video content to the end user.
In a sane world (and in the 90s) google would be broken up and sued into the ground for breaking open web standards. But they're allowed to get away with this crap these days because they're got the might of the entire Government behind them.
I expect to see other websites follow suite soon. We're watching the web die in real time.
No.5031
Following the rules becomes increasingly disadvantageous
No.5036
>>5030I want people to stop using youtube. Or bring it back to 2006 and put a 5 min limit.
No.5037
>>5030It's been dead for years. The cancer that is LiveScript/JavaScript/ECMAscript, or whatever else you'd like call this plague, has rotten it from the inside out: You now have effectively no choice but to execute absolutely random proprietary programs on your machine the moment that they load. This hell. We can get out, but we'll have to skin a few hundred "people" alive. Violence is not an option; it is the only solution.
No.5038
kissu is an imageboard of peace
No.5042
yt-dlp has to be patched and packaged for the OS I'm using on several of my computers. Since it's currently stuck at one version behind I thought I'd do everyone a solid and go ahead and port it myself.
Well I discovered the yt-dlp maintainers have decided to pull in something called deno as a dependency. I saw it was ported (although no fully) to my OS so that saved me a lot of work. But then I saw this:
>Deno is a simple, modern and secure runtime for JavaScript and TypeScript that uses V8 and is built in Rust.
>built in Rust
So I'm screwed a long with everyone else using these computers. Up until last week yt-dlp allowed you to browse and watch youtube videos by piping them into mpv on all these computers. No more. This change effectively makes it so using yt-dlp is no different than using a mainstream web browser engine. Which also refuse to run or build on these machines.
The only hope is someone forks yt-dlp going forward and start to maintain the old js engine. Which is only about 700 lines of code last I checked.
Really getting sick of developers being lazy and using their laziness to justify using this stuff in everything. I have no idea why everyone feels the need to make 10 year old computers obsolete for no reason. It's frustrating.
No.5043
>>5042I've found a work around for now although it's not ideal.
The older versions of yt-dlp continue to work fine with invidious instances. So I can still browse videos that way with some simple modifications to my scripts for searching/browsing videos in terminal before pipping them into mpv.
But this is not really ideal. I'm going to see if I can by-pass youtube's new stuff directly without pulling in a full blown javascript runtime.
No.5044
After a long night I finally got yt-dlp ported over to my OS again and pushed it on to ports. But now it requires cross-compiling for everything but x86-64 machines. I got it running on x86 32-bit machine but it's still broken on various other non-x86 platforms including some odd ARM computers I have laying around. Mainly due to the new Rust dependency in deno. But at least I can still access youtube on some of these machines for now.
The Rust ecosystem is a real pain in the ass to deal with. I understand why they refuse to allow it into the base system now on this OS. Looking around to see if there is another js runtime that isn't tied to it so closely. I don't really care about the "security" aspects when I'm just using it to download videos. So far they haven't added another way to specify another js runtime in yt-dlp. They really need to do that soon.
Oh and I discovered the massive blacklist within yt-dlp to prevent you from using it on "piracy websites". Which is such bullshit. I'm currently going through and removing them to see what works right off and what will require extra work.
I am seriously considering forking this now.
No.5045
>>5044For what it's worth there were plans to support multiple js run times (like node/bun). But last week someone decided deno was going to be the way forward and locked further discussion. Along with deleting all replies pointing out how it'd break a bunch of platforms.
See:
https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/pull/14157So keep an eye on it. Some people are not happy about it and if they drag their feet on supporting multiple runtimes with CLI option we'll probably see another fork.
The reason given as always is "security" but it's half truth as usual. Since it's easy enough to limit any runtime's access to system resources using usual methods. In fact, I'd say building some kind of chroot/jail/container for all of them would be the best way forward since we're now going to be required to run google code on our machines to access the content at all. I don't trust deno to prevent them from snooping around since breaking out of it is pretty easy as is.
It's frustrating to see people that care nothing about older machines (some less than 5-10 years old right now) so willingly break support on them simply to chase a fad language.
I'm surprised yt-dlp has managed to avoid having a major fork already. Considering all the bickering going on within the github discussions. So many PRs and discussions have been closed simply for moralfag reasons. The blacklist of websites is massive.
No.5046
If anyone is interested in what's currently being blocked due to moralfaggotry on yt-dlp you can find the list here:
https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/blob/bd5ed90419eea18adfb2f0d8efa9d22b2029119f/yt_dlp/extractor/unsupported.py#L239 No.5047
>>5046Also this is only sites that were once supported then removed when the current group took over the project after it was renamed from youtube-dl to yt-dlp.
They maintain a much larger list that they refuse to share. Those sites just throw up "unsupported" error.
No.5105
>>5046>>5104The sites they're blocking I've never heard of, is there any extra reason to use the fork now if I'm not gonna use any of those sites?
No.5108
>>5105>The sites they're blocking I've never heard ofneither have I, but it's not about those specific websites; it's about the principle. Imagine the tool telling you how and how not to use it, ew, couldn't be me
No.5109
>>5046>not supported primarily used for privacyWhat the fuck do they thing yt-dlp is used for? It's surely not to legally download content. God I hate this. Everything eventually turns to shit.
No.5110
>>5109It's called plausible deniability.
No.5114
>>5110Then they shouldn't have made and maintained the software in the first place; can't plausibly deny more than that. Your move, corpocutie
No.5116
>>5046Out of curiosity I went through most of the listed websites and noticed that it's all asian porn, hentai or 3D. One of them were ceased by japan as well, I think this list was forced on them by porn copyright holders (of all things). Seems more plausible than the dev team being angry at the idea of someone using this tool to illegally download hentai from some decrepit porn websites when there are bigger fish out there, I don't think its out of a moral stance that they're enforcing this if nothing else. Their page has history of being taken down after all
No.5271
Youtube is such ass to work with when you're the youtuber
No.5325
>>4495No one is willing to do the needful of walking away from big tech and degoogling (plus deamazoning, demicrosofting...) their lives. But all other video hosts are either terrible in UI, slow as molasses, overloaded with politislop and "freeze peach" scummy scams (looking at you, gab and minds), or in most cases all three.
Maybe it's time to go back to pre-pootube Internet of web2 and web1, and even earlier. If you can live without your let's plays, amateur true crime documentaries, lore icebergs, and so on.