If rolled out widely, this would make web browsers and third-party YouTube clients without a DRM license unusable for YouTube playback, download, etc. This would include almost all open-source web browsers and almost all third-party YouTube clients. Archive link to reddit post about this

    • Yingwu@lemmy.dbzer0.comOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      The issue is that hosting costs for videos are insane. There’s nowhere else to turn except for Youtube (unfortunately PeerTube is so far off being a reasonable alternative). I would love to see some more competition, but I don’t see it happening in the close future. The sad state of things is that 90% of the population won’t care if their favorite MrBeast video has DRM.

      • Francisco@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        The sad state of things is that 90% of the population won’t care if their favorite MrBeast video has DRM.

        Agreed!!

        (unfortunately PeerTube is so far off being a reasonable alternative)

        Why? Because of the hosting cost? Where is Youtube getting this for cheap?

        • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Because of the hosting cost? Where is Youtube getting this for cheap?

          More than 500 hours of video content are uploaded to YouTube every minute (reference). The cost of operating this system is astronomical. Building a competing platform is entirely out of reach unless you have nation-state levels of wealth.

          YouTube’s costs are effectively subsidized by Alphabet (Google). All of the restrictions being implemented are about trying to make YouTube profitable, especially by protecting the ad revenue stream.