Watched Louis Rossman today, and he’s part of the team behind a new app for watching online video content - not just youtube, but nebula, peertube, twitch and more.
adblock already integrated, works amazingly with a quick test on my end - it’s an app in the Lemmy spirit
(it’s got a paid model similar to winrar, you don’t have to pay - but they do want you to - opensource and all)
basically Newpipe but only source available, not really free software or open source, so they are restricting your freedoms.
Just keep using Newpipe instead.
It is open source but you can’t publish modified code (this is to ensure there will be no malicious forks like there was with newpipe)
plus you missed the entire point:
It’s an app that allows you to watch the same creators across many platforms
That’s not what most people consider “open source”.
It’s pretty hilarious that Rossman thinks malicious forks are going to care about the license, lol. Malicious devs clone Candy Crush and every other proprietary app they can find just to insert ads or maybe malware. Plus, basic trademark law already allows fighting fake apps, I don’t see how such a restrictive license is supposed to help.
That’s not the problem. The question is, stopping actors that put ads and paywalls behind modified source, which technically isn’t malicious, it’s just being a jerk and this licensing makes it much easier to take down. Ofc, if he actually wanted it to be open source, he’d just force all derivatives to be non commercial.
A non-commercial license is generally not considered to be FOSS (“open source”). If you build a great, ad-free version that forks off because you disagree with some decision (i.e. you have a fancy recommendation algorithm that upstream doesn’t like), normal open source would allow you to sell access to that app.
I get that he wants a “just in case” clause to take down forks Rossmann doesn’t like, but the way it’s stated makes the project sound dickish.
Yeah… You’re not going to stop any of that without war.
Oh yeah, because someone who wants to do that is going to see that and think oh no, he doesn’t want us to, guess we shouldn’t
That’s not the point. The point is takedown actions being a lot easier especially if one of the idiots tries to argue against
I mean, at least in this case he can take down fake copies from the most popular app stores. That mitigates the reach of malicious clones a lot.
Rossman is an idiot, that’s how. Luckily he’s a useful idiot in most cases.
I half expected this from Rossman, but he hasn’t written a single line of code. The license seems to have been partially copy pasted from somewhere else, probably by one of the devs. Surely they would’ve informed him about how stupid the license idea is, or at least told him to ask his lawyer.
Luckily the title does state “temporary license”, maybe they’ll swap it out for a normal license down the line.
FUTO Temporary License (FTL) violates the following open-source principles:
The FTL enables the following practices:
Wow, this is a high quality comment.
I guess it’s understandable to be concerned about licensing when putting money and work into a project like this, but I still hope they change their mind.
“open source” to enshittification pipeline license
Your avatar is not ironic, is it?
newpipe does YouTube, SoundCloud, Peertube, and Bandcamp. NewPipe isn’t YouTube-Only.
It does them very poorly
FLOSS or die
Whew
The term “open source” generally refers to the definition by the Open Source Initiative.
https://opensource.org/osd/
Not allowing publishing of modified source code is in violation with the criteria of open source.
that is not open source. That is source available.
because we all know that license agreements are a line that trojan distributors will not cross. Not malware distribution, not hacking laws, but copyright infringement. They’d never do that at all.
I believe it would be significantly easier to submit a takedown request for copyright issues, compared to reporting an app for being malicious.
That’s not the case at all. These kind of Trojan operations are fly-by-night setups, and have the advantage of being able to react far faster than the official Devs. By the time you as the dev even know of the app’s existence, they’ve already infected hundreds. And when you do get round to filing a takedown notice, they’ll be back up the next day under a different name.
Even Nintendo can’t get copyright infringing shit off Play Store in any fast capacity. Heck, Google will even run ads for people blatantly breaking copyright laws.
Edit: and that’s before considering that Google won’t let them onto play store and being only source available excludes them from eligibility for official F-Droid repos. They’re going to have an absolute bitch of a time dealing with fakes and Trojans, even if they didn’t release the source code at all
…so it’s newpipe.
You can’t search multiple platforms at once with newpipe. This is a bigger thing that you think.
Also it has recommendations
I could not find a link to the source on the website 🤔 do you know where the source is?
Edit: https://gitlab.futo.org/videostreaming/grayjay
I don’t believe newpipe has a way to cast so that’s what I’m interested in here
If you watch the video, Louis explains why they only made it source available
Nah, Louis explains that the app is open-source, but describes open-source as source-available.
Have you used it? It’s like NewPipe except that it’s better in almost every way. The ONLY downside is that it’s just old-fashioned open source instead of FOSS.
It’s not open source
Source available has never been the definition of open-source.
Incorrect. People have been calling random software open source since the 80s, because it’s a very vague term. The new definition that you think is gospel wasn’t invented until the OSI was formed in '98.
“open source” is a self explanatory phrase. The source code is open, therefore it’s open source.