cross-posted from: https://lemmy.org/post/1872634

So, starting now, Google started mandating full JS for YT, effectively breaking all third-party clients and locking the site to their official client.

This reeks of DRM.

UPDATE: Installing Deno and installing yt-dlp through PyPi fixes yt-dlp but the very idea that Google is mandating JS to lock down YT in an attempt at pseudo-DRM is still crappy.

UPDATE #2: inv.nadeko.net is working again for now.

  • REDACTED@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Your new monitor likely has DRM features built in that are already being utilized by Netflix and others. Youtube is next on the line

    • melfie@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Yeah, I think Netflix has like a few thousand movies and a couple thousand TV shows, and some of us here have similarly sized Jellyfin libraries. On the other hand, YouTube has billions of videos. It seems DRM would be a significantly more difficult and costly problem for YouTube.

    • yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      18 hours ago

      DRM is expensive. Very expensive in fact because it is basically non-trivial encryption.

      A website with as much traffic as YouTube cannot afford to DRM every single video stream. There just isn’t enough processing power and electricity available.

      Netflix et al. have a tiny fraction of YouTube’s traffic with more income per user due to subscriptions.

      Plus YouTube’s storage demands are many orders of magnitude larger. A maximum upper bound for Netflix is 1 PB I’d imagine. Archiveteam alone has selectively downloaded more than 3 PB. YouTube has, I’d imagine, a double digit exabyte amount of data stored + backups.

        • yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Do we know this?

          I suspect they usually compress videos at most a couple times (for each resolution) and then keep the results cached somewhere. At least for popular videos that combined take up 99% of bandwidth. For 0 views videos I’d imagine they only store the highest resolution and compress it further down on demand.

          I’d argue DRMing all those popular videos would take up so much computing power it cannot be offset by ads.

    • DFX4509B@lemmy.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      Whatever the latest version of HDCP is, sure. HDCP is a core feature of the HDMI spec.

      • REDACTED@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        22 hours ago

        I was actually thinking of DisplayPort since I haven’t used HDMI for quite some time now, but pretty much the same thing, except for name - DPCP, but supposedly DP also supports HDCP.