this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2025
199 points (99.0% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

58590 readers
511 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):

🏴‍☠️ Other communities

Torrenting:

Gaming:


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

We are getting reports of YouTube rolling out an experiment to some accounts where normal videos only have DRM formats available on the tv (TVHTML5) Innertube client.

This is not limited to yt-dlp. Tests have been run with the same account on various official YouTube TV clients (PS3, web browser, apple tv) and they are also only getting DRM formats for videos.

We live in hell-world.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (3 children)

Peertube is f****** amazing, But your average windows user isn't going to be able to manage the hosting. And your average ISP blocks standard hosting ports. Then it also requires the users to manage their own monetization.

It's not undoable but it is kind of a steep slope.

[–] RiQuY@lemm.ee 3 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

You can use an already hosted instance, there is no need to selfhost every service.

[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I think they were maybe speaking to the peer-to-peer "hosting" part of peertube. If not enough people are contributing to bandwidth, then more falls back to the server, increasing the cost to run it.

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 6 points 15 hours ago

Mainly storage. The only reason these free hosted sites can stand up is because they have low traffic. If 0.01% of YouTubers started dumping all their video over there, they'd quickly run the free services out of town.

Realistically, If it were easy enough for everyone to host locally (torrent style) and people paired up with hosting partners for backups, peertube could be an amazing Youtube alternative.

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 1 points 18 hours ago

Paying for bandwidth and cloud storage rates for video hosting is pretty much worst case. I'd argue that if you were going to self host anything video would be the most important

[–] kat@orbi.camp 2 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I joined it but the main feed was just a lot of NSFW content.... So made it kind of awkward for discovery.

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 2 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Discovery is a major hurdle. There are plenty of instances that don't have NSFW you should poke around to find something suitable.

[–] kat@orbi.camp 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)
[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 2 points 13 hours ago

With good content? That's a hard find :)

Plenty without NSFW though

I frequent https://v.basspistol.org/ but they're mostly music

do keep in mind you can also use their filters

like these on https://vid.freedif.org/

collapsed inline media

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Everyone doesn't have to host their own instance.

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 3 points 10 hours ago

Everyone doesn’t have to host their own instance.

They don't, but how long do you think a free instance is going to last when it starts seeing serious volume. Video storage in the cloud is expensive AF.