• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    212 years ago

    I think they want everyone to use user agent switcher so that Firefox share will drop and then nobody will support it and will die.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          6
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Here’s one, though several others offer the same functionality.

          Custom mode:

           {
                "www.youtube.com": "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/104.0.0.0 Safari/537.36"
           }
          
      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        32 years ago

        Yeah I used a user agent switcher that didn’t seem to have a blacklist feature that I could find and it broke every cloudfare site.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    782 years ago

    They finally made YouTube unusable for me even with ublock. Refreshing the filters didn’t work and told me I could only watch 3 videos.

    Google was always going to win the war but I didn’t expect it to be like this.

    I’m now using piped for all YouTube videos.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      32 years ago

      What works for me is opening a new Private windows on Firefox, with ublock installed, and then login into YouTube. I do have to login every time I hope a private windows by so far I’ve been able to watch unlimited videos with an ad blocker installed

    • Herbal Gamer
      link
      fedilink
      English
      72 years ago

      You are remembering to purge all caches before refreshing I hope?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      152 years ago

      I randomly stopped getting the anti-adblocking. On my gaming PC I never got them, on my laptop they went away after I disabled my adblocking for one video and then re-enabled it. Now I don’t get them at all. Did they give up on me?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 years ago

          They no longer appear for me. The biggest change for me was just using uBlock Origin. Previously I also had Ghostery. If you run multiple extensions for privacy, try dropping them and only using uBlock.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      42 years ago

      I wish Piped worked for me, I was trying to watch a Linux tutorial in full HD to see the commands better and Piped just refused to buffer the video.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        72 years ago

        There are other alternatives too, like invidious. The yewtu.be instance works decently well for me but limits to 720p I think. There is a list of all running instances somewhere on the github iirc. There’s other instances that allow full HD, just have a search and you should be able to find one.

            • Karyoplasma
              link
              fedilink
              English
              0
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              My YouTube redirect rule is a bit more complex, but works for all shorts, youtu.be and regular youtube links and it supports time stamps and videos that are part of a playlist.

              Set the rule to regular expression, use this one

              (?:https?:\/\/)?(?:www\.)?(?:youtube\.com\/(?:watch\?v=|shorts\/)|youtu\.be\/)([^&?\/]+[&?]?.*)

              remove the two “amp;” at the end (Lemmy formatting is bad, it replaces an ampersand with & even if you tell it not to…) and redirect to https://%yourinstanceofchoice%/watch?v=$1

              Enjoy!

              • Konala Koala
                link
                fedilink
                English
                12 years ago

                Okay, what I was trying to do with Redirector is have it so I can search and browse videos on YouTube, but when I click on something that I want to watch, it forwards me to the same video on YewTu.be instead.

                • Karyoplasma
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  1
                  edit-2
                  2 years ago

                  That’s exactly what this is doing. It captures all youtube.com/watch, youtube.com/shorts and youtu.be/ pages and redirects then to the same page on invidious. Just replace %yourinstanceofchoice% with yewtu.be.

                  If you don’t open videos you want to watch in a new tab, you also have to go to Advanced Options in your rule and tick “HistoryState” else it will bypass the redirect.

                  This should work for you:

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      13
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Using an alternative front end isn’t losing

      Once they get rid of front ends and you go back they’ll have won

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      52 years ago

      Try opening your subscription page as usual with your ublock, but then right-click “open in private window” the videos you want to watch. Works for me.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22 years ago

      I’ve been trying to get ReVanced working on WSA and it force closes at start.

      Going to give newpipe a try, thanks!

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 years ago

          yeah its installed! I even downloaded the specific version of youtube the patcher wants, IDK what I’m doing wrong

          Do I need to patch on my phone and then use that apk on the PC?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              12 years ago

              Stop screwing around and just get newpipe or libretube. The UI is a lot simpler and they are much more stable at the moment.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12 years ago

      Discovering freetube was the best thing of my video browsing life. It works so well it’s incredible Feels good to not be continuously tracked while watching videos.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    812 years ago

    YouTube thinks aarch64 Firefox is… a HiSense TV!!!

    Ah yes, televisions are exactly where the user wants lower resolution

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    662 years ago

    User Agent String: A browser’s way of lying about what it is, in order to not trigger some server’s arcane content filtering system.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      512 years ago

      User Agents should be optional. The whole idea of the Internet was that the server should respond the same way to the same request regardless of the client’s qualities.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        72 years ago

        There are qualities that are useful for having different responses, like supported language, whether the browser accepts gzipped content, etc.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          92 years ago

          Fuck that shit.

          • You can do language codes in the URL to serve different versions of content
          • If your browser can do TLS then it should be able to handle gzip content or alternatively if the internet didn’t allow cookies and scripting in your browser then it would have been safe to use TLSs built in compression

          Check out the Gemini protocol if you want to see that a lot of HTTP spec stuff is completely unnecessary

          • xcjs
            link
            fedilink
            English
            02 years ago

            The issue is that some of those techniques are only useful after the client has rendered the content rather than before.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              12 years ago

              But they are useful and completely valid ways of dealing with the problem.

              It is not the end of the world if I have to click am extra once or twice to change the language. Hell most websites have much harder processes just to reject cookies.

              Personally I would rather err on the side of slightly extra work the odd time I’m not on a website not in my native language than have an extra bit of information that can be used to track me.

              Again take a look at the Gemini protocol, its a perfectly fine browsing experience without all the cruft.

              • xcjs
                link
                fedilink
                English
                1
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                Valid, but not standard and more inconvenient.

                Additionally, you act like query strings can’t be used to track you when they certainly can.

                Most of the advantages of Gemini are implemented in the client and not the protocol itself.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              Some widely spoken language I imagine, Chinese, Spanish, English I don’t care. Since .com is intended for commercial use, the language of the companies biggest market makes sense here as well.

              You’re also forgetting that the likes of google.ru, google.nl and google.every_other_country_code exist.

              Also there are plently of websites the have language selection in the site that overrides that header, look at Wikipedia.

              There are plently of sites in non english languages that cater to non English speakers only, not every site has or needs 10 different translations.

              At this point we also have translation engines in the browser so for pages in languages you don’t know, that you absolutely need to access, you can use it to understand the page to a decent level and/or be able to navigate to a version in your language if available.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  1
                  edit-2
                  2 years ago

                  I just used it as an example since it’s pretty much the lingua franca of the internet and it’s what we are currently using. The same argument applies to any other language.

                  My main point with that bit was that a lot of content exists on the internet without any translated versions and the world hasn’t ended because of this, look at non English Lemmy instances.

            • Terrasque
              link
              fedilink
              English
              62 years ago

              First language in Accept-Language header that server also support

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    542 years ago

    I like how nobody actually bothered to read the thread and doesn’t understand this is a bug and wasn’t done on purpose.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      412 years ago

      Quite a reductive statement based on a very small obscured window into what Google is doing with user agent profiling but go off I guess since you’re so sure

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        102 years ago

        Are they determining that Forefox is Hisense TV on purpose? Again, read the linked thread for a change.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        152 years ago

        It’s not. First of all, the code doesn’t check for Firefox at all. Second, it blocks 4K for all Android devices. Conclusions people came up with here just show utter ignorance.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 years ago

          Google has teams of highly paid expert engineers who’s entire job is to maintain and develop youTube. What do you think is more likely:

          1. Google’s engineers were unable to tell that performance in Firefox is degraded by their changes.
          2. Google sees it as advantageous to disadvantage their competitors - including Firefox. And although they might not be able to do it deliberately, for legal reasons, they can still do it by introducing platform specific changes and strategically neglecting to make it work properly.
    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      62 years ago

      Shhhh. We’re hating on YouTube as we want ad free videos but don’t want to pay for it and we’re hoping that bitching about it on a tiny social media platform will somehow get Google to pivot their entire business model.

      We don’t need no facts here.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        Did YouTube make all of those videos? If not, then how much should YouTube get from hosting them? This whole argument that people just want free shit isn’t just wrong, it’s also annoying. People have proven time and again that we’re willing to pay for quality and convenience. And not in that order. Once again it’s an issue about access, how they’re fighting tooth and nail to gatekeep that access to continue to control the flow of capital so they can also play the kingmakers in digital media. Messages like yours are so off base that it’s hard to believe you’re not projecting your own shitty world view, but also somehow think that because you’ll gargle some shitty ads every once in a while that you have some moral high ground. AKA; one of those people who believe they’re right and that’s all that matters and you don’t actually have to think any deeper. PS: I hope I’m wrong. Please feel free to correct my own world view if I am.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          62 years ago

          Did YouTube make all of those videos?

          Nobody is claiming they did

          If not, then how much should YouTube get from hosting them?

          Whatever the free market will pay. Like with any other product.

          This whole argument that people just want free shit isn’t just wrong, it’s also annoying.

          A paid option is available to those who find the ads annoying.

          Those who refuse to pay and try to block the ads are freeloading. Simple as that.

          People have proven time and again that we’re willing to pay for quality and convenience.

          And yet here we are. Yet again on Lemmy. Yet again with the crybabies wanting ad-free and cost-free shit without considering that someone somewhere has to pay for it. Google is not a charity.

          Once again it’s an issue about access, how they’re fighting tooth and nail to gatekeep that access

          What? Competitors exist. YouTube is free for nearly everyone.

          You are free to use the alternatives if you disagree with how YouTube works.

          That’s how the free market works; nobody has a gun to your head.

          Messages like yours are so off base that it’s hard to believe you’re not projecting your own shitty world view, but also somehow think that because you’ll gargle some shitty ads every once in a while that you have some moral high ground.

          I pay for premium. I’m happy to pay for content I enjoy and I’m happy that the creators I enjoy watching get a cut without me having to watch annoying adverts.

          I do not expect handouts. There is nothing “shitty” about paying for things.

          Maybe tone down the extremism and personal attacks against a stranger, huh?

          AKA; one of those people who believe they’re right and that’s all that matters and you don’t actually have to think any deeper.

          🥱

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12 years ago

            And yet here we are. Yet again on Lemmy. Yet again with the crybabies wanting ad-free and cost-free shit without considering that someone somewhere has to pay for it. Google is not a charity.

            I was tempted to state that I was wrong, clearly you have thought about this, but I don’t agree with this perspective at all and won’t be changing my opinion. If we’re in the business of calling things out that “nobody said,” then nobody said Google was a charity.

            That’s how the free market works; nobody has a gun to your head.

            The ‘nobody has a gun to your head’ approach to laissez-faire mercantilism likes to ignore how important free market access is. Lack of access can be just as bad as a gun to the head, if not sometimes worse. This is a one sided argument in favor of corporatism that doesn’t address access. The main thrust of my point.

            I pay for premium. I’m happy to pay for content I enjoy and I’m happy that the creators I enjoy watching get a cut without me having to watch annoying adverts. I do not expect handouts. There is nothing “shitty” about paying for things.

            I don’t think YouTube has ever left me feeling like it had any regard for me as a consumer or even valued my time. It appears, from the many complaints I’ve seen by YouTube content creators, that many of them don’t feel valued or respected either. By the time Premium came along it had long lost me as an interested customer. There’s no feeling that one should honor a one-sided social contract because that requires an actual relationship. If I felt that YouTube actually cared about anything other than being the middle-man that ensures that I get served ads, and demands–but not delivers–respect for it, then maybe I would reconsider. Until then, I will enjoy their competing products. Ad-Blockers and supporting alternative hosting sites that make me feel more valued. They’ve assisted in creating their own black-market for ad-avoidance, and that’s the free market working.

            Maybe tone down the extremism and personal attacks against a stranger, huh?

            🥱

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              2
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              I was tempted to state that I was wrong, clearly you have thought about this, but I don’t agree with this perspective at all and won’t be changing my opinion.

              I guess we’re done here then.

              The ‘nobody has a gun to your head’ approach to laissez-faire mercantilism likes to ignore how important free market access is.

              Oh, were still going. Okay.

              Erm. YouTube is free. It’s only not available where countries have blocked it.

              Lack of access can be just as bad as a gun to the head, if not sometimes worse.

              What? YouTube is not a necessity to human existence. It’s not food or shelter.

              That’s a stunning level of entitlement on show there.

              I don’t think YouTube has ever left me feeling like it had any regard for me as a consumer or even valued my time. It appears, from the many complaints I’ve seen by YouTube content creators, that many of them don’t feel valued or respected either. By the time Premium came along it had long lost me as an interested customer.

              Fair enough. So you’re going the ad route then?

              There’s no feeling that one should honor a one-sided social contract because that requires an actual relationship. If I felt that YouTube actually cared about anything other than being the middle-man that ensures that I get served ads, and demands–but not delivers–respect for it, then maybe I would reconsider.

              Ah, so you’re freeloading.

              Until then, I will enjoy their competing products. Ad-Blockers and supporting alternative hosting sites that make me feel more valued. They’ve assisted in creating their own black-market for ad-avoidance, and that’s the free market working.

              If you don’t want to pay, or view the ads, you should opt out and use an alternative or go without. That’s the ethical choice.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                1
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                Excellent argument all around. I like that it stayed on point and didn’t devolve into something else entirely. I know you and I don’t necessarily agree, but I respect that you stood your ground and as a result, you as a person. I do feel that you could put more value into the demand-side of things, AKA, the consumer but there’s a bit of nuance there and we probably have different approaches that solve the same ideal. My follow on points would have been to argue that YouTube isn’t deserving of being given a social-contract of ethical conduct etc etc. I would also address that YouTube is central to some livelihoods and the financial well-being of others. I really wanted to highlight the sense of irony that I get that you would call a group of people crybabies and then feel personally attacked when someone took you to task and stood their ground on the counterpoint; however, I concede that if I had known you would have felt personally attacked I would have picked a softer tone and for that I apologize. I think we can both acknowledge that we’d only be arguing nuance at this point and that’s not a worthwhile use of our time. You sir (edit: or ma’am, or something in between, if it pleases), are not an NPC. (also edit; upvotes given for the statements except the original statement I disagreed with)

        • Streetdog
          link
          fedilink
          English
          42 years ago

          My local supermarket isn’t producing most of the products it has on its shelves, so fuck them too I guess.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Good counter-point, except that your local supermarket has to respect three separate market pressures that Google (edit: to be clear, I mean YouTube) clearly has no regard for:

            • Tight regulations.
            • Respecting its consumers.
            • Robust competition that isn’t prone to monopolistic enterprise.

            So no, I don’t feel that we should ‘fuck them, too I guess’ because when I go to the supermarket I feel like I’m the customer, not the product. I feel that I get what I’m paying for and that my time is respected. Nothing about YouTube leaves me feeling like that. There’s no sense that I’m a respected customer and therein no sense that there’s any value in trying to respect a clearly one-sided relationship.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      422 years ago

      Having bugs for platforms outside the walled garden is a feature of the walled garden. That’s the beauty of it, they don’t need to purposefully cripple Firefox and other engines if they just don’t take it into account when creating features.

  • ShaunaTheDead
    link
    fedilink
    292 years ago

    It might just be a coincidence but I’ve had a lot of trouble using Invidious or Piped lately too. Videos load and titles load, but video thumbnails don’t load for me.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      152 years ago

      I’ve had issues with Invidious and Piped literally every time I’ve tried to use them. Can’t understand how people even use the public servers.

      However I have disabled Piped proxy in LibreTube and been using that for a long while but for the last week or so it hasn’t been working at all.

      GrayJay is still working though.

      • spez
        link
        fedilink
        English
        42 years ago

        There was a problem with DASH. Now it’s fixed, it should work with the proxy enabled.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          As I said, it’s never worked with the proxy enabled. And it’s still not working with it disabled, right now.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          62 years ago

          It’s the same with all the other frontends (LibReddit, Nitter, etc.). They never work and everyone is just like “try a different instance!”. How many dozen different instances should I try before I give up?

          Shout out to Stealth (Reddit) and Squawker (Twitter), those both work the vast majority of the time without any “instances” to depend on or switch through.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12 years ago

            I tried it and my main complaint was it was like 720p, so lower quality (noticeable to me just looking at it). But it “just worked” for me. But I’m also not interested in YouTube enough to play this game - if they block me, I stop going there. It seems like they give up blocking me every so often (or something updates IDK).

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 years ago

            there’s a browser extension called libredirect that has a keyboard shortcut to switch between instances. you can also use freetube/newpipe/mpv.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            32 years ago

            Google is blocking popular instances these days, so yeah, you basically need to find an unpopular instance, which usually means it’s new and may not live for long, or it will quickly become popular, because it works, which will cause Google to block it.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 years ago

            Good to know about Stealth. Thanks!

            Yeah I might try the others a couple more times before giving up but it’s not gone well for me thusfar. Libreddit and invidious worked for me for like 4 days last time, both crapped out about the same time. It’s annoying to have to repeatedly troubleshoot what used to be something you could basically count on working

          • Very_Bad_Janet
            link
            fedilink
            12 years ago

            Do you have a link for Stealth? Libreddit was working for me up until two days ago.

  • Epzillon
    link
    fedilink
    English
    612 years ago

    The more bullshit like this I read about YouTube the more I despite them. I already use GrayJay on mobile and I’m using ublock Origin + ublock Matrix on Librewolf to control cookie usage on desktop. So far I’ve been able escape the video player block by clearing cache.

    I’m just waiting for the day they “force” me onto another frontend.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      52 years ago

      im using librewolf too. i keep seeing the adblocker active warning instead of a video, in the video-box on youtube Plays just fine in private window though…

      • Epzillon
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        Even after clearing the cache from the ublock filter settings?

    • Jeom
      link
      fedilink
      English
      112 years ago

      doesnt ublock origin already block youtube’s anti adblock?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 years ago

        It sort of does for me. I used ublock to block the popup and the overlay that prevents you from using the site. Sometimes a video will stop playing for a moment, but it resumes as soon as I hit play.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          52 years ago

          Then your uBlock Origin filters aren’t working properly. See this thread for instructions on how to purge and update your filters to block YouTube’s ads and YouTube’s adblocker blocker.

          • Epzillon
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12 years ago

            I mean after clearing the cache it disappears. But I’ve seen the “your video player will be blocked” 3 or 4 times during the past few months maybe.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              0
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              Those 3 or 4 times may have been after Google had updated their anti-adblocking stuff and before uBlock Origin had updated their anti-anti-adblocking stuff.

              Also, do you have any other adblockers installed? Does your browser have its own adblocker? Either of those can cause interference with stuff like this.

              • Epzillon
                link
                fedilink
                English
                12 years ago

                Nope, I use Librewolf with uBlock Origin, uMatrix and BitWarden. Nothing else.

                But yes, I haven’t seen it in quite some time now.

  • TheMurphy
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1582 years ago

    Someone, light the EU signal!

    Lawsuit intensifies in the distance

  • Engywook
    link
    fedilink
    English
    75
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    From what I can understand from the thread, they aren’t deliberatly crippling FF.

      • Kalash
        link
        fedilink
        English
        15
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Which turned out to also have nothing to do with FF but is targeting adblockers.

      • deweydecibel
        link
        fedilink
        English
        242 years ago

        The way I read it is Chrome gets a pass on the architecture crippling, the others don’t.

        Someone correct me if I got the wrong idea.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          202 years ago

          So Google is saying out loud they are trying to be Microsoft and abuse its near monopoy to push their other products.

          Got it.

      • Engywook
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        It looks like also this was against adblocker so, again, not specifically Firefox. Quote from the article itself:

        The issue was initially reported as targeting Firefox users, but users online have said they’re seeing the delay in Chrome and Edge, too. Reddit and Hacker News users who’ve examined the code that appears to be causing the delay have said they see no indication that YouTube checks what kind of browser is in use. Mozilla’s senior brand manager Damiano DeMonte wrote in an email to The Verge that “there’s no evidence that this is a Firefox-specific issue.

        • Ace! _SL/S
          link
          fedilink
          English
          52 years ago

          Reddit and Hacker News users who’ve examined the code that appears to be causing the delay have said they see no indication that YouTube checks what kind of browser is in use

          That means nothing, this check could be done on the server side and noone would know

          • Engywook
            link
            fedilink
            English
            82 years ago

            I mean… We can we can invent a thousand conspiracies if we want to…

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            6
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Except that the delay and ad blocker check is literally in the JavaScript code, you can see it.

            • Ace! _SL/S
              link
              fedilink
              English
              5
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              Indeed, but google can just transmit different javascript to different users/browsers/regions etc (that’s why browsers have useragents, so websites can improve browser compatibility according to the circumstances). It can be decided on a whim and noone would know except some coders at google

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                2
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                Except everyone would know. Multiple people across the globe testing different browsers have looked at the same JavaScript code that is being sent to the browser. The check is there, client-side, google isn’t sending a different JavaScript payload for different browsers. Like you said, they could, but that’s not how it currently functions