Piped
piped.video
An alternative privacy-friendly YouTube frontend which is efficient by design.

Original title: “Misunderstanding Your Job Description - Delivery” by Viva La Dirt League

Delivery man Byron learns some really important information about his job… that he probably should have learnt 6 years ago…

For those who don’t know the show: It’s important to understand that Byron is a very, very dedicated employee, who accepts any challenge, and takes great pride in his work. His colleagues sometimes don’t remember him after working with him for years.

  • Spzi@lemm.eeOP
    3·
    1 year ago

    Oh, sorry! In the last 30 or so posts, I always included both. This time, for some reason, I thought no one would care. Thanks for your feedback, I’ll make sure to include both in the future.

    • amanaftermidnight@lemmy.worldEnglish
      15·
      1 year ago

      IMHO video links should always be YouTube first, then third party mirror second, in the body or comments. Here are the reasons:

      1. YouTube is the primary source. Always prioritize the primary source when you’re sourcing.
      2. Think of the URL being shared as the primary key to a database record. Lemmy can use it to detect dupes. With YouTube URL there’s like 3 forms, discounting timestamps. With piped links the possibility expanded to 3+(number of piped instances on the web). This massively increases the likelihood of accidental reposts.
      3. Give people a choice of whether they want to watch on the original site, or on a piped instance of their own choosing. When you link to a piped instance link you rob people of that choice.
      4. A piped instance can choke or go offline at any time. YouTube is close to 100% uptime.
      5. Userscript wise, it’s trivial to map YouTube URLs to a user’s piped instance of choice, but it’s so much more tedious to detect and map every single piped instance.