We sorely need a Truely FOSS/Libre Alternative to GrayJay (Preferably under an AGPL Licence) So to get the ball rolling, What does GrayJay have that FOSS alternatives like let's say NewPipe doesn't ??
this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)
Technology
77899 readers
2933 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Why can't they be a website than an app for Dekstop?
Also understood that they're not open-source but are they privacy-respecting?
Edit: Went through their privacy policy and seems they're privacy-focused. I will be trying their app now.
Personally I've been using FreeTube for accessing YouTube as they are FOSS. Only thing I wish they would have a feature to share like subs with Tubular and watch history somehow. It doesn't have all the platforms Grayjay has but for just YouTube its pretty great
I really wish there was a truly open source version of GrayJay because GrayJay is actually Not OpenSource It's a cool application, don't get me wrong, but it NEEDS to be OpenSource & not "Source-First/Source-Available"
It is open source, just not free open source
It's proprietary
No it's not. SF license allows for noncommercial modification, and it is Source Available.
Typically licenses not OSI approved are referred to as "Source available" rather than "Open source". This is one reason FUTO (who make Grayjay) refer to their license as "Source first" and not "Open Source" (though they did call it that for a while before clarifying and switching to the new term).
And by "clarifying" you mean "dunking on Open Source and parading around like the saviors of the human race for inventing Open-Source-except-with-donation-nags-to-fund-their-fully-for-profit-business." Good job, guys, you've solved enshittification (/s).
But they do provide a good alternative for watching videos on multiple platforms without ads, without subscriptions or anything. And the app works if you don't pay as well. Just because they ask money for their hard work while at the same time allowing the community to work with it sounds all good to me. It's just not completely open source and completely free. But feel free to make a non-profit true open source counterpart if you like :)