Since every other discussion seems to be getting derailed with Hooktube/Anti-hooktube flaming. So type away! I'll start:
Anti-hooktubers, why don't you like Hooktube? Are you incredulous to the legitimacy of such a project? Or do you think it's unethical? Or are you frustrated that there are people using Hooktube and not looking for a true, viable alternative to YouTube?
Name:
Anonymous2017-11-11 5:20
Because its 1.Not an alternative. Its just embed youtube. 2.Its doesn't stop youtube from knowing that you watch it. 3.Its not a proxy and gives you a false sense of security. 4.Most expirienced users already adblock all of youtube.
Name:
Anonymous2017-11-11 5:35
Surprisingly good answer. I was expecting something more contrarian, but you're totally right. I mostly use Hooktube because I can't view comments on vanilla YouTube and still block the things I want on uMatrix. I also find that Hooktube is easier to navigate.
The burden of proof is on the hooktube lodge, not us. Youtube is perfectly fine, we all use adblock and noscript anyway and I don't give a shit about stroking some content creator's ego by ++ his view counter.
Name:
Anonymous2017-11-11 10:29
It's really quite an innocuous thing to get worked up over.
Name:
Anonymous2017-11-11 13:21
I was wondering when this thread was going to be made. :) Coming from the pro-HookTube camp, I use it for multiple reasons, one because YouTube since their last major redesign has become unnecessarily bloated. Two, because YouTube has initiated sneaky censorship tactics like placing videos in a "limited state" and I can use HookTube to get information and data from a video that's been placed in a limited state. For example, this video by Black Pigeon Speakshttps://youtu.be/NanumqpBDtA was placed in a limited state recently and as is, I cannot see how many views it has, how many thumbs up or down, nor any comments or recommended videos that you often see to the right.
With the same video using HookTube https://hooktube.com/watch?v=NanumqpBDtA I can see that (as of this post) the video has 159,262 views, 12,302 thumbs up, 436 thumbs down, the list of suggested videos to the right and it can fetch at least some of the top comments that were left on the video. I can also download the video in mp4 format without having to fickle around in a command line with
That's actually not entirely true. It fetches the video from YouTube and it plays in your browser's native HTML5 video player instead of YouTube's normal player. It only switches to regular YouTube embed when YouTube will not allow it to fetch and download the video. NSFWYouTube (http://nsfwyoutube.com/ ), that I used to use a lot more often before I found HookTube, uses just plain YouTube embed to bypass having to login as a user for certain videos.
2.Its doesn't stop youtube from knowing that you watch it.
How would it know, if you are not directly connecting to YouTube? HookTube is a middle site that downloads the video and then it serves it to your browser, YouTube thinks that HookTube is just another user downloading the video using
youtube-dl
or
wget
and the big difference is it would see HookTube's IP and not yours in doing so.
3.Its not a proxy and gives you a false sense of security.
See above.
4.Most expirienced users already adblock all of youtube.
HookTube isn't just to get away from video ads as I demonstrate in >>7
Name:
Anonymous2017-11-11 14:10
>HookTube is a middle site that downloads the video and then it serves it to your browser This is retarded. YOU BROWSER USES JAVASCRIPT FROM HOOKTUBE TO LOAD A VIDEO...FROM YOUTUBE. There is no "middle site" its interface to youtube. Its basically a glorified userscript. User Request Policy and it will show the site connecting to googlevideo.com
Name:
Anonymous2017-11-11 16:47
>>9 You get a clean interface with the video, and the video itself doesn't have your view counted.
It is true that youtube-dl/mpv makes a lot of the practical advantages of Hooktube/nsfwyoutube redundant; however, there's something to be said about the Hooktube in the context of content blockers--so called "adblockers" like uMatrix--because there is a distinction, in that Hooktube is a centralized, universal solution to the same problem that content blockers address, and that is significant. Why? Because not all web browsers have content blockers, nor do all laypeople use (whether that's because they don't care or don't have the know-how is insignificant) content blockers. The latter is really important, because it reveals how elitist the adblock argument really is since adblock users are at the end of the bell curve--content blockers are not the precedent. And while there will always be a persistent niche that uses content blockers, there will be people that simply have to accommodate advertisements, phishing attacks, & c. due to sheer ignorance. Hooktube subverts all that.
It's true that Hooktube isn't a real solution to the YouTube problem, but I don't think that argument in itself is enough to dismiss Hooktube, because Hooktube can still do something really valuable: it can change the precedent. Hooktube can change the expectations that laypeople have when they think of a site like YouTube by universally change the quality of how those videos are served by means of a cleaner UI, no adverts, no tracking, & c..., which can catalyze the demand (and support thereby) of a real YouTube solution.
There are retards on /g/ who literally don't even realize that Hooktube is just a glorified YouTube overlay.
Name:
Anonymous2017-11-12 8:44
>>12 I've said in another thread regarding HookTube that it's largely an intermediary between the current awfulness of YouTube and a site that's finally a complete break. There are already alternatives like pew.tube, d.tube and BitChute and they seem to be developing at their own pace. The people I personally follow all have backup channels on BitChute. However, they're still quite small sites and YouTube is still so large that they can afford to continue to shoot themselves in the foot for the foreseeable future. I doubt that they will stop at bullshit like placing videos in a limited state and HookTube has been a gift in bypassing that as I mentioned before in >>7.
>>13 /g/ is using HookTube? I haven't said anything positive about /g/ in years, but that's a good thing. And so what if it's just some "glorified YouTube overlay"? It's something that is needed for some people at this point in time.
Name:
Anonymous2017-11-12 8:47
using hooktube is like putting a condom onver a hammer when driving nails into the wall
>>14 No, /g/ hates Hooktube, despite the fact that they barely grasp what Hooktube is. Actually, wasn't it a /g/ user who made Hooktube in the first place? There's a Hooktube thread right now, and half of them are still convinced you're supposed to upload videos to Hooktube.
Actually, wasn't it a /g/ user who made Hooktube in the first place?
I don't know if Swack is a /g/ user, but he is on Voat and that's where I found it.
There's a Hooktube thread right now, and half of them are still convinced you're supposed to upload videos to Hooktube.
Lmao. Never change, /g/.
Name:
Anonymous2017-11-12 22:57
I used not to like it because it did not work with youtube-dl. Now I do not really care bout I am slightly annoyed that they demand to have JS active in order to watch a video.
>>32 All things considered, YouTube is actually pretty restrained. It's more of a fundamental issue of maintaining one of the biggest video repositories in the World. In fact, censorship is kind of hyperbolic (although totally valid in sentiment) since YouTube doesn't really take the videos, so much as just restrict discussion. Hooktube is, in fact, kind of proof that YouTube doesn't censor. The obvious flaw in my logic here is that content creators can't survive on videos that can't be monetized/redistributed and thus are herded to making less inflammatory, "problematic", content.
Ah, but that's not the only way you can make money on YouTube. I think the real issue here is copyright. Look at MDE, not a single monetized video. In fact, all of the MDE videos are realized under the free, creative commons (I think it was nc but I don't remember) license, and they're still here. Why? Because fans can redistribute their works. And the fact that their videos aren't monetizeable is, in a way, advantageous, because their friends know enough to know that it's on them to donate if they want to see more MDE. The PBS model, for God's sake! Think outside of the box! Adverts? Sponsorships. Dontations. There's more than one means of revenue. Which is why I don't think complaints about YouTube's post-"adpocalypse" censorship is valid. It's just a new paradigm.
Name:
Anonymous2017-11-14 13:35
>>32 You dumb nigger YouTube is a private business and they can do whatever they want with your shitty opinions
Name:
Anonymous2017-11-14 14:46
>>35 I feel like Patreon supports both. A more apt name would be the Kickstarter model, since they're exclusively that. Either way, it clearly gets the job done.
YouTube is a private business and they can do whatever they want with your shitty opinions
And I can use a service that utilizes their open API. And fuck the argument that because it's a private business they can do whatever. They're a monopoly and they need to be dealt with.