I have been happily using PipePipe for the past few months and have been very satisfied with it. The developer seems to spend the time and attention needed to make it work again whenever youtube likes to change things and I really appreciate that.
I think it's been about 6 months or more for me and I am also very satisfied with it. I left NewPipe because I'd often have to wait days to weeks for simple fixes to get implemented. PipePipe is patched very often.
Same. My only issue (with NewPipe also) is that at ~50 subscribed channels, Google rate limits me when I refresh. I wish there was better logic to get new content or a way to space it out over an amount of time.
Same. It's also less buggy, and they've fixed long-standing navigation gripes I had with NewPipe. I did disable the SponsorBlock integration because I find it quite annoying to go back on a skipped sequence.
I just use ReVanced. I like shorts and recommendations and don't really care about privacy when most of my feed is football highlights, K&P sketches, gaming channels and random bullshit comedy videos. But having a full open source alternative is still important.
Used through all of the apps and personally there's little incentive for me to not use Firefox/Fennec. The only issue is that background playing is flaky, not sure it only works on my Poco F7 and not my S23, or if it randomly starts pausing the video when leaving de browser or even if it's a browser or OS power saving settings. But when it works it works flawlessly.
In any case, there needs to be a huge problem to justify installing an android app. I prefer to keep them to a minimum and focus solely on the browser. It's the only vendor safe option which I can use to bail entirely on Google's Android or iOS and go some place else.
One of the reasons why I use an app to view YouTube is to disable suggested videos and comments. Basically, I want to have a personalized list of the channels I view as worth watching and I want to discourage continued watching outside of those boundaries.
I don't have a problem with compulsive watching, so for me the subscriptions view is good enough. I think there are be extensions for Firefox to customize the layout the way need, but it falls in the pitfall of relying on YouTube code for it to work, so it's bound to be flaky or have a short lifespan.
For the most part, I've been using the apps for so long that compulsive viewing is not an issue on my end either. That said, I do have my days and I don't want to slide into that habit. By sticking to my curated list, I am limited to a couple of hours of videos a week. Quite often it turns out to be less since I've grown much more selective about what I will watch from that list.
Been using pipepiple since December of last year, very happy about the app. The developer seems to care about the project and introduces a lot of quality of life improvments.
> In summary, it can be said that sponsoring is a good approach. It is fair and non-discriminating to all users, preserves their privacy, lets creators select their partners themselves, and provides them with a larger share of the revenue. Even though there are some disadvantages, it is more or less beneficial for all sides. [...] Ethical advertising, for example through sponsorship, should therefore not be touched by us. This would turn our key selling proposition from being privacy-friendly to being a gatekeeper for advertising. And this is not what NewPipe ever has been or wants to be. We’ve always stressed that NewPipe’s main goal is to protect the users by maintaining their privacy, not to, e.g., provide features a user would otherwise have to pay for, for free. Regarding SponsorBlock: after a lot of discussion within the team, we decided not to support this system. As stated earlier, we don’t consider advertising in general problematic. It’s the unethical, privacy-invasive systems that are very common today which we consider evil. Sponsorship provides a mostly ethical way of advertising.
> Thus, employing a system to bypass those ads is harmful to those creators.
There's an obvious catch-22 here: either you are maintaining privacy, and the sponsor has no way to know whether their segment was viewed, so you are wasting your life watching an ad to make an inanimate object happy, or they are spying on you to learn whether you watch it.
Either way I fundamentally disagree with them on the idea that push advertising is ethical in the first place, but it's kind of absurd thinking about people feeling good about themselves for watching a recording. Like did you also not fast-forward your VCR through ads in those days and instead dutifully watch attentively lest God know you were naughty? You make sure to read all of the spam in your mail, or inserts in newspapers rather than chucking them in the bin?
> There's an obvious catch-22 here: either you are maintaining privacy, and the sponsor has no way to know whether their segment was viewed
The same way they did in the past, with broadcast radio and television: they base it on audience numbers rather than tracking whether people actually listened or viewed the ad. Besides, isn't one of the major motivators of tracking to avoid fraud? (Which I find ironic, given I don't view advertisers as very ethical in the first place.)
> Either way I fundamentally disagree with them on the idea that push advertising is ethical in the first place
The way I think of it: advertising doesn't have to be unethical, but it incentivizes unethical behaviour.
> Like did you also not fast-forward your VCR through ads in those days and instead dutifully watch attentively lest God know you were naughty?
I would typically walk away to do something else. Same outcome though. That said, I started to turn away from broadcast media in the early to mid-1990's. I forget whether it was due to advertising, but the end result was a lot less exposure to advertising. Which is a good thing IMHO.
I actually think this is 100% the correct move practically, as someone who thinks advertising is unethical. Keeping it out of this popular option while remaining open source allows the original to be clear from "wrongdoing" here and does not put so much pressure on creating an arms race. Then, the fork just adds sponsorblock, and things are ok.
As I see it, it's similar to the situation with FOSS passkey options. Currently the big projects are complying with all of the (increasingly silly, imo) demands of the standards org. If they did not, there would be significantly more pressure for attestation, in which ultimately only Google/Apple/Microsoft-controlled options would be permitted. Complying allows a fork to patch out the user-hostile behavior.
But NewPipe clearly circumvents YouTube ads so not sure how they wouldn't have faced pressure otherwise, and it's actually more so that YouTube doesn't care about sponsorship segments as they make no money from it so NewPipe would be even more in the clear if they didn't block YouTube ads but blocked sponsorship segments.
There is no wrongdoing though, except for the people that decide to build machines to waste other's time. Imagine spending your life on that. There's no need to carry water for the people who dedicate their lives to making everyone else's lives a little worse. Like if the wealthy paid people to go around littering (which, in a sense, is basically what mailers/inserts are).
Passkey likewise is a retarded idea with no user empathy, and by going along with their demands, you still push people into monopolistic ecosystems because the only way to use it in practice is with a cloud sync service. There's likewise no need to carry water for it. Anyone advocating for it outside of scenarios where you have an IT department to maintain it is either a fool or a shill.
Also NewPipe is still niche and appeasement isn't going to do anything. They'll end you when they feel like it. c.f. the tightening of the Android software monopoly in general. At some point they're just going to block NewPipe entirely. It's not like Google is thinking "well it's okay if they block our ads as long as they allow in-video sponsors." Nor are they ever going to think "wow maybe we should have some morals; maybe our global surveillance system we've built was a bad idea. I can't believe we didn't realize that!"
Well, that's why I scarequoted it. Morally I agree with you, and for the same reason I will not support LLMs and the companies pushing them. But as it is, the techbros and the adbros will continue to move fast and break things, and nobody will check them, so if some people can divert them into breaking slightly less, it is a small consolation.
They circumvent YouTube ads but draw a line at in video ads? Their stance is inconsistent, not to also mention that lots of sponsorship ads can be unethical (see the outrage over BetterHelp) while normal YouTube ads don't have to be unethical.
Issue further is that sponsorship ads put the onus on the video authors themselves to make a judgement call and put their own reputation somewhat on the line.
Rather it lets them creator-wash half truths and potentially misleading information.
Not that I think youtube or other ad platforms make great decisions on ads one bit either, its all just a very abusable medium.
> As stated earlier, we don’t consider advertising in general problematic. It’s the unethical, privacy-invasive systems that are very common today which we consider evil. Sponsorship provides a mostly ethical way of advertising.
Considering the fact that the vast majority of YouTube sponsors seem to be some kind of scam or are privacy-invasive themselves, the word “mostly” is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.
I haven't been able to watch youtube in the browser for ages. I get like one 10-20s chunk then nothing further. Do you use just the standard block lists?
Are you using a VPN? Youtube will be a jerk to those IPs. I need to set my exit node to either Poland or Albania to watch YT. (The latter incidentally is supposed to act as an ad-blocker due to local legislation banning some types of ads, but I have my own ad-blockers so I cannot confirm.)
From time to time I get blocked by YouTube and both NewPipe and PipePipe become unusable. I wonder if it has something to do with my internet provider putting me behind a CGNAT proxy
Use Invidious, self-hosted or otherwise with the Sponsorblock extension and you get these benefits everywhere - mobile, desk/lap/${whatever}top instead of just on a single device. Yes, you need a mobile browser which supports extensions but then again, you want to block ads and other malcontent anyway so you may as well use Firefox or one of its derivatives.
I have had this issue few times on a specific wifi router (different router on same line doesn't) so don't know exactly.
In any case, there needs to be a huge problem to justify installing an android app. I prefer to keep them to a minimum and focus solely on the browser. It's the only vendor safe option which I can use to bail entirely on Google's Android or iOS and go some place else.
> In summary, it can be said that sponsoring is a good approach. It is fair and non-discriminating to all users, preserves their privacy, lets creators select their partners themselves, and provides them with a larger share of the revenue. Even though there are some disadvantages, it is more or less beneficial for all sides. [...] Ethical advertising, for example through sponsorship, should therefore not be touched by us. This would turn our key selling proposition from being privacy-friendly to being a gatekeeper for advertising. And this is not what NewPipe ever has been or wants to be. We’ve always stressed that NewPipe’s main goal is to protect the users by maintaining their privacy, not to, e.g., provide features a user would otherwise have to pay for, for free. Regarding SponsorBlock: after a lot of discussion within the team, we decided not to support this system. As stated earlier, we don’t consider advertising in general problematic. It’s the unethical, privacy-invasive systems that are very common today which we consider evil. Sponsorship provides a mostly ethical way of advertising.
There's an obvious catch-22 here: either you are maintaining privacy, and the sponsor has no way to know whether their segment was viewed, so you are wasting your life watching an ad to make an inanimate object happy, or they are spying on you to learn whether you watch it.
Either way I fundamentally disagree with them on the idea that push advertising is ethical in the first place, but it's kind of absurd thinking about people feeling good about themselves for watching a recording. Like did you also not fast-forward your VCR through ads in those days and instead dutifully watch attentively lest God know you were naughty? You make sure to read all of the spam in your mail, or inserts in newspapers rather than chucking them in the bin?
The same way they did in the past, with broadcast radio and television: they base it on audience numbers rather than tracking whether people actually listened or viewed the ad. Besides, isn't one of the major motivators of tracking to avoid fraud? (Which I find ironic, given I don't view advertisers as very ethical in the first place.)
> Either way I fundamentally disagree with them on the idea that push advertising is ethical in the first place
The way I think of it: advertising doesn't have to be unethical, but it incentivizes unethical behaviour.
> Like did you also not fast-forward your VCR through ads in those days and instead dutifully watch attentively lest God know you were naughty?
I would typically walk away to do something else. Same outcome though. That said, I started to turn away from broadcast media in the early to mid-1990's. I forget whether it was due to advertising, but the end result was a lot less exposure to advertising. Which is a good thing IMHO.
As I see it, it's similar to the situation with FOSS passkey options. Currently the big projects are complying with all of the (increasingly silly, imo) demands of the standards org. If they did not, there would be significantly more pressure for attestation, in which ultimately only Google/Apple/Microsoft-controlled options would be permitted. Complying allows a fork to patch out the user-hostile behavior.
Passkey likewise is a retarded idea with no user empathy, and by going along with their demands, you still push people into monopolistic ecosystems because the only way to use it in practice is with a cloud sync service. There's likewise no need to carry water for it. Anyone advocating for it outside of scenarios where you have an IT department to maintain it is either a fool or a shill.
Also NewPipe is still niche and appeasement isn't going to do anything. They'll end you when they feel like it. c.f. the tightening of the Android software monopoly in general. At some point they're just going to block NewPipe entirely. It's not like Google is thinking "well it's okay if they block our ads as long as they allow in-video sponsors." Nor are they ever going to think "wow maybe we should have some morals; maybe our global surveillance system we've built was a bad idea. I can't believe we didn't realize that!"
Well, there are people that actually like work in the marketing space. As scary as it sounds.
Not that I think youtube or other ad platforms make great decisions on ads one bit either, its all just a very abusable medium.
Considering the fact that the vast majority of YouTube sponsors seem to be some kind of scam or are privacy-invasive themselves, the word “mostly” is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.
Personally I use my own fork of FreeTube on desktops, though, falling back to Firefox with uBlock when there are outages.
"This repo is discontinued.
I can no longer dedicate time to this project.
For alternatives, see: