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@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    2 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

      • Ilandar@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        2 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.

        • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I mean, you don’t call it whatever you like, but content is the technical definition of it.

        • arglebargle@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I agree with this a lot. I really do not like the term “content”. It is like going to a recipe for some “slop”, like using a term that is just a catch all for everything tossed on a plate.

          Art is great. Movies, music are also fine terms. And so is simply saying they made a video. Watering it all down to the term “content” is just so boring and mind numbing.

      • sailingbythelee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 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.