cross-posted from: https://discuss.tchncs.de/post/22423685

EDIT: For those who are too lazy to click the link, this is what it says

Hello,

Sad news for everyone. YouTube/Google has patched the latest workaround that we had in order to restore the video playback functionality.

Right now we have no other solutions/fixes. You may be able to get Invidious working on residential IP addresses (like at home) but on datacenter IP addresses Invidious won’t work anymore.

If you are interested to install Invidious at home, we remind you that we have a guide for that here: https://docs.invidious.io/installation/..

This is not the death of this project. We will still try to find new solutions, but this might take time, months probably.

I have updated the public instance list in order to reflect on the working public instances: https://instances.invidious.io. Please don’t abuse them since the number is really low.

Feel free to discuss this politely on Matrix or IRC.

    • ElectricMachman
      link
      fedilink
      English
      66 months ago

      To answer the “why”, it’s because the word “content” is kinda meaningless. Instead of making films, documentaries, talk shows, reference guides, cartoons… it’s all just this generic “content” slop that’s just there to feed the machine

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          86 months ago

          It’s not that strange, I have a friend who literally said the same thing today in reference to one of his favourite channels shutting down. He preferred to call the stuff on this channel art, rather than content. I agree with the person above too, the term has always bugged me. It makes it sound so mass produced, like your job is to just produce meaningless “content” for people to mindlessly consume. And to be honest, that’s exactly what the mainstream YouTube culture is about.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          36 months ago

          Not really. The term “content creator” is corporate speak. Google’s ad-based business model has a binary classification: content and ads. It’s not an inaccurate term, but using it implicitly endorses the corporation’s binary world view.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        36 months ago

        That’s pretty insulting, a lot of what YouTube creators do takes real skill, and it’s a full time job for many.

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

          In the past maybe, but certainly not these days. It’s overglorified corporate money grab propaganda, that goes around shamelessy guilt tripping viewers when truth is spoken. Much of these so-called content creators do not much else than making face react videos to something they saw and just talk about their likes or dislikes. They get paid lots just to make a soy-jack face and shitty clickbaits. The amount of money some them get paid is large sums insane for little efforts in proportion to what worth it actually ought to be. There people out there putting real efforts and labor to contributions to society to keep it running that paid squat in comparison. Its sad really. Go ahead downvote me, it doesn’t change the truth i speak.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        116 months ago

        Showman/woman refers to a pretty specific type of performer, I.E someone who is on stage typically.

        Entertainer isn’t a label I’d necessarily apply to educational content, for example.

        • ElectricMachman
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -66 months ago

          Then call them educators, or presenters… teachers, maybe, depending on the nature of their work

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            156 months ago

            Yes it’s much better to use

            “comedians/teachers/musicians/educators/entertianers/phonereviewers/sportscommenters/singers/journalists/programmers/documenters/analysts/lawyers/lockpickers/politicians/presenters/trolls”

            … than…

            “content creators”.

            • ElectricMachman
              link
              fedilink
              English
              06 months ago

              If you find someone that fits all those categories, I wouldn’t begrudge you that

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            76 months ago

            What do you have against creators as a label? I don’t really see these difference myself.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -3
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Or just call them Content creators, recognize they don’t really produce value for anyone but YT’s grab on the attention economy and start living in the real world.

      • JackbyDev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        96 months ago

        Not all content is entertaining. Someone who makes tutorials I wouldn’t call an entertainer. That’s why “content creator” is used as a catch all term to cover all of it.