Experimenting with the YouTube audio fingerprinting system

We've been hearing lately that "the kids" prefer the degraded sound quality of MP3 files: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=511615

Anyone want to bet that, a year or two from now, we'll be reading that "the kids" prefer listening to sped-up music?

Also, I object to The Waitresses being labelled "one hit wonders". The author apparently forgot about the ubiquitous holiday song "Christmas Wrapping".

Really interesting reading, to learn how Youtube build its signature, and the get the works-for-all solution: increase your copyrighted music speed by 5%, ingenius :)

"Apparently they don't really care about repeat infringers"

I would be careful about operating under this assumption. Google's habit of locking out accounts across all of their services is well-documented. You wouldn't want that to happen over something silly.

As I keep saying on HN, if people hosted 9mb clips on their own webserver, with Flash video streaming technology, there would be no way of censoring it.

Not quite off-topic, but related is: Can you currently stream Flash video off an Apache webserver? If not, would a startup writing a plugin for it be a good opportunity?

Does anyone know if YouTube actually removes clips containing parts of copyrighted films? I doubt it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_video_fingerprinting

Eh - what's the bet some do-gooder Googler reads HN and lowers the thresholds / throws in some more types of checking, and it's an arms race, and this person will have just helped them to improve. Still, /someone/ had to do it.

Great read! It would be nice if someone tested if 5% increases in video content also get through. I wonder if this will lead to a new generation of piracy on YouTube,

A 165 second chunk from the end of the song passed as well. One may only need a slightly altered mix of the song to circumvent the audio filter.

Wow he shelled out $349 for Adobe Audition 3. That is dedication.

Fantastic read, thanks for sharing!