So they should either introduce a cookie banner, find an alternative host that more strictly adheres to privacy concerns, or just host the video themselves in a video element.
I’ve done this in the past by literally grabbing a screenshot of the video thumbnail (and the play button) and adding a link to that image.
Sure, it won’t play in the same page and won’t be up to date with thumbnail or other presentation changes but I didn’t care - it was a small image that also didn’t include any executable code or privacy risks.
Someone just pointed out I have the same problem on my blog and I'm very pissed. It's not enough that their embeds break every Lighthouse metric and recommendation. It's all this, too
Google's become a marketing-profiling engine, wrapped in ad-serving infrastructure, wrapped in the decaying remnants of a search engine.-
I’m not sure you can fully blame Google for what the web became though. Part of the reason search engines are close to useless here 24 years later is because most of the content people produce go to SoMe sites. Sites like Hacker News, sites like Medium and so on and because of how everything became a popularity matrix people are posting soooo much useless stuff online. Where it used to be you actually had to have something to say to bother putting it online, because it took an effort, we now live in a world where 90% or the talk people do is while they’re on the shitter. Those 90% is a number I pulled out my ass, but it would be hilarious to see an actual number on just how much internet “content” gets created by people on a toilet.
It is what it is though. To make a functional search engine today which was on par with Google in 2000, you’d probably need access to browser bookmarks of the people you’ve ranked as having interesting taste in what they bookmark. Which probably isn’t really possible without breaking a lot of laws, if at all.
Edit: I am vegetarian, probably has something to do with it.
The reason I know a shit should take 30 seconds is because there is this Danish doctor who has spent like 30 years studying how we shit, and her name is Gert which is typically a male name. Anyway some years back she was on TV telling the nation how to shit, and it sort of went viral and now everyone above a certain age basically knows who Gert “who knows how to shit” is.
But yeah, for some it’s definitely an escape. Particularly at work.
A little chewy, but you get used to it. And you definitely aren't short of fiber if you also have a salad that day
That didn't last very long. Even before geocities there was a huge amount of random/pointless stuff online. It was okay though because those people weren't looking to make money. They didn't feel the need to misrepresent or SEO the hell out of their personal sites to drive traffic.
Greed killed the internet. Once people started putting up websites with the intent to line their own pockets instead of doing it just to share something fun or cool or personal or helpful it was doomed. Corporations quickly got involved and everything else got crowded out, bought out, or replaced by ad-filled trash.
I'll pull out an equally haphazard guess: Up to 5%.-
Anyway, I’d like to NOT embed YouTube. Maybe I will anyway, but I wonder if anyone has alternatives, especially if they are scrappy, tiny alternatives like those that I imagine 100r might produce.
I’m considering MP4 or WebM in HTML and wilder ideas like an audio file and a few images that are started at the same time with JS.
This actually works.
We should all feel very embarresed such a thing is possible.
You can apparently write software and/or create protocols that measure their success in moaning about revenue loss.
the political kerfuffle because drm/dmca really has nothing to do with it but i can't shake the feeling that you are involved at this level. god bless
Laws that require changing our entire civilisation and culture are not your friend. You dont want to search everones house to check if they own a radio or tv. If that happens depends on who is asking. It isnt a static group. It might begin with heroic crime fighters but we can expand or replace the effort with new business logic. First we need to prevent you from reading a harry potter registered in someone elses name, then we need to be able to take your music purchases away from you until eventually we need to lock you up for subscribing to the wrong youtube channel 30 years ago.
It isnt actually as absurd as not having video on websites in an afordable way.
All those people working at youtube and all of those giant servers. It takes a truly monumental effort to use the wrong technology.
I have to watch ads to pay for it? Advertisers have to influence content to pay for it? Our best men to keep the eyeballs on ads to pay for it?
I have over a thousand yt subs to deleted channels for a laundry list of resons. There use to be threaded discussions and video replies. It all had to go to pay for it?
All the horrors of central planning without the nice things the communists prommised us?
All that to make sure some people get paid for things other people did 70 years ago?
If that is what it costs they should not be paid. I hope little jimmy downloads all of their movies, every tv show, all the video games, all of their music, all of their books and all of their published papers.
They wanted little jimmy to pay for singing happy birthday on video. Imagine the money they lost that day. All of those birthdays!
We could have had birthday inspection squad teams. Fight the crime at the source.
that sounds a lot
The trick is to look for things not discovered by the masses. The reason (i wont call it a mistake) is almost always not publishing frequently enough. (Not that i dont watch popular things or everything in between.) Infrequent publishers dont get very noisy.
Yeah. The so-called "Net Vicarious Loss" (NVL) protocols :)
Even the ‘Bible’ app requires constant updates, I thought the final version was released quite some time ago
... even when, sometimes, it is those very updates that bring the software down.-
Not the prettiest or purest solution, but very simple.
Can't recall where though.
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/171780?hl=en#zippy...
You’ll have to learn some ffmpeg incantations but the bandwidth will be free and your total costs will be the tiny VM and block storage. Might even be able to point Cloudflare at a public bucket and skip the VM.
If you need to store and serve several terabytes of content, a dedicated server instead of block storage will be your best bet (again with Cloudflare), you’ll just need to figure out offsite backup and restoration.
I think by keeping the HLS segments at a few megabytes each and not using a file extension in the URL, I've slipped through the cracks.
(My religion forbids me from recognizing any terms of service that haven't been given the three blessings of the matriarch)
Saint Trader Joes tried to unite them by using both light and dark sesame years ago, but there’s just too much bad blood for them to work together. We are still waiting for the chosen one that will bring balance to the bagel.
May the bagel balanced be.
> Unless you are an Enterprise customer, Cloudflare offers specific Paid Services (e.g., the Developer Platform, Images, and Stream) that you must use in order to serve video and other large files via the CDN. Cloudflare reserves the right to disable or limit your access to or use of the CDN, or to limit your End Users’ access to certain of your resources through the CDN, if you use or are suspected of using the CDN without such Paid Services to serve video or a disproportionate percentage of pictures, audio files, or other large files.
- https://www.cloudflare.com/service-specific-terms-applicatio...
Reading between the lines a bit: they really only care if you're using Cloudflare to front a site whose primary purpose is to deliver video content, and lots of it (like, say, if you're running a tube site or a livestreaming site). They don't care about web sites which happen to incidentally include a small amount of video content.
Just make sure that player supports right click->Save I'd much rather download and view a video in VLC than somebodies janky JS player
give site-url to mpv
watch video
PS:
vlc can play from urls too, but isn't as compatible with the way most sites implement it
What else am I missing?
I know because I explored this for a hobby project of a movie I liked. See here: http://lelandbatey.com/projects/REDLINE-intro/
Use your network inspector to observe your browser requesting the individual chunks over time. Note that my server is just an Apache2 file server.
most video players also support http and there is no problem with just putting files up.
imho all the streaming tech, drm, hls, adaptive bitrate selection and whatnot, are just commercial fads to increase margin
sending the whole file at network-speed usually works fine, but maybe uneconomical at scale especially if coupled with users that skip a lot and tend to not watch the whole thing anyway.
[1] https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/userguide/tutori...
My host doesn't support video. If I point <video> at a file it plays just fine but the server doesn't do partial content so the player crashes or stutters if the user attempts to seek outside what was downloaded. When the whole thing is downloaded it works smoothly but it isn't quite acceptable. There is no easy html way to preserve the seek/progress bar and `Accept-Ranges: none` has the same meaning as not setting the header(?)
I cant seem to find answers or bugs, all I find "make sure your server supports partial content" which really isn't required to make it work.
I'm surprised to see my inexpressible urges documented by others. I'm with these people 100% right down to why a sailboat.
I tried to do this with an apartment building. The building is too large to focus on a the detail I need. A 43' sailboat is actually a great size to prototype on.
I have a signed P&S and hope to be hard core boat living sometime in September. The idea will be the studio time I get while on land will be much sweeter if I spend a lot of time on a boat.
The boat is self-contained so my aspirations won't effect people paying rent.
The building has everything I need to host my own streaming. I don't know that I will ever publish content, but if I do it will be entirely self-hosted. If the audience is so vast that brings everything to a halt, things will start functioning again once the hordes get bored.
Think of all the wasted brain power content-creators go through to keep YouTube at bay.
I believe content should be the residue of the work. I think once publishing is the funding source it may distort the work.
This will work for now but my mind still wonders if there isn't a better way to reduce the size of these. I'll continue to experiment.
I use lite-youtube on my site for this reason. Instead of embedding the YT player directly, it shows a thumbnail that pulls in the embed when you click to watch the video.
That way visitors aren't tracked unless they actively click the thumbnail to watch the embedded player. Iirc it also works as just a link so visitors have the option to cmd+click or right-click-copy to avoid the embed.
Also what kind of name is "100 rabbits". Reminscent of "50 blessing" from hotline miami
Just displaying the page with the embed hits those sites. All in all there were around 20 successful network requests made to load the site. There were another 7 or so requests the Ublock Origin blocked, to play.google.com/log, and then after the page loaded it continues trying those every second or so, although it seems to have slowed down after around 19 but is still ongoing.
It leaves 5 cookies (4 persistent, 1 session) and also looks like it has something in IndexedDB.
Similar with Firefox in a private window except it stores one fewer persistent cookies.
On Safari in a private window it has similar network access, but no cookies.
The "\u263Eoe\u2721is\u271E" of online politics if I've ever seen. Nearly meaningless but people place great emotional and identity-based weight on it (even if they've signed away all their data via TOS, as they likely have).
Sidebar—why does hacker news fuck with arbitrary unicode codepoints? Strikes me as deeply user-hostile behavior.
The symbols you wanted to include are in the Dingbats and Miscellaneous Symbols blocks, which I expect are all banned because they contain some emoji and this was the cheap way to be rid of those, quick test: "" "", that's a Miscellaneous Symbol and a Dingbat of no emotional valence to speak of and certainly not colourful ones.
As you can see, that's the deal: they're casualties. I wouldn't mind a more discerning filter, but then again, I wouldn't mind a dark mode, and here it is, years later.
Evidently they've blocked far more than just emoji—I was just using standard unicode.
This is meant to be a representation of this image https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coexist_(image) for people too lazy to copy and paste
This is a perfect candidate to host yourself and just slap it in some <video> tags.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/vi...
Half the """GIFs""" you see online are webm. Just put a webm. They work great.
Content-Security-Policy:
default-src 'self';
frame-src 'self';
script-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline' 'unsafe-eval';
style-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline';
img-src 'self' data:I feel it’s such a “I am very smart gotcha” comment that isn’t helpful in any way.
It distracts from the actual topic.
This is noteworthy because it’s 180 degrees opposite from how most HN people live and what they do.
I feel we should change society somewhat
... could a bunch of self organized comunes such as these ever replicate such industry?
It is peculiar no self-standing group such as this has - AFAIK - attempted such a thing. Why don't they start there?
I doubt they are actively trying to trick people into letting down their "adblocker" guard so they can retarget them with advertising...
I have compassion for their cause. Read 2 articles and was intrigued.
At the same time, spotting such an obvious mistake does make me wonder if their articles have glaring mistakes in them as well.
Someone is aware of the issue of online tracking and tries their best to get rid of all of these things (web fonts, analytics,...) and even states their intent "No tracking". One day they make a small mistake and don't realize that sharing a YouTube link on their website drops a cookie and immediatelly all the good they are trying to do is forgotten.
I hope you never make mistakes.
You can spin it any way you like. Claims should be backed and checked, else credibility flies out the window. I don't get how that's not glaringly obvious.
And you seem to read way too much into this mistake, promptly distrusting all the content they ever made or wrote.
Next time you make a mistake, I hope people around you will treat you the same way you treat other people, let’s find out if you like that.
It does matter, it is important. Making such a mistake calls into question if they don't have other, more serious, mistakes in their actual articles.
> Next time you make a mistake, I hope people around you will treat you the same way you treat other people, let’s find out if you like that.
I don't make extraordinary claims so I am not bound to provide any extraordinary evidence. They do make an extraordinary claim.
> I don't make extraordinary claims
That seems like a pretty extraordinary claim to me. That you've made. Twice.
This shows such black-and-white thinking, thinking in absolutes that doesn't take in account, the context and circumstances.
To me it shows a rigid mind that can't perceive nuance, and think / reason about topics in a particular context.
Minor mistakes are often just that: minor mistakes. If this was an error in a scientific paper or news article, your stance may have had more merit. But that's not the context here at all.
> I don't make extraordinary claims so I am not bound to provide any extraordinary evidence. They do make an extraordinary claim.
A blog claiming not to track you isn't an 'extraordinary claim' by any definition. So that's a mistake on your part, so I can't take anything you say seriously anymore, by your own definition.
Privacy Badger can replace YouTube embeds with "click to activate" placeholders. Faster browsing, better privacy, easy-to-use controls, at least when the replacement works properly.
See "Pro tip #1" in https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/01/privacy-badger-puts-yo...
Main Menu > Extensions > Extensions Manager > Privacy Badger > Settings > Tracking Domains > search for youtube.com > tap to update the toggle for youtube.com to red
Privacy Badger blocked tracking from:
Because If you use anything from Google, you will be tracked.