This is really cool, but maybe the README's disclaimer should also warn that using YouTube's private APIs is against their Terms of Service[0], specifically this section:
The following restrictions apply to your use of the Service. You are not allowed to:
(...)
3. access the Service using any automated means (such as robots, botnets or scrapers) except (a) in the case of public search engines, in accordance with YouTube’s robots.txt file; or (b) with YouTube’s prior written permission;
It would be great if YouTube updated their ToS to permit this because that could unlock some really interesting innovation. Until then, devs should at least be aware that building a product with these APIs is risky.
I don't see why YouTube would want to allow any of this; the APIs probably changes regularly, have documentation only available internally, and they can't attribute the use of these APIs to specific Client IDs for abuse (ie. bypassing rate limits by using these); this is not mentioning how there's $0 to gain from doing this, and it could actively cause them to lose money since the RIAA has DMCA'd even the mention of downloading music videos from YT[0]. If they wanted to introduce any more functionality to the API, they'll simply add it to the official API and extend the docs[1].
As a regular user of NewPipe, I disagree that it's a "massive" pain point. NewPipe works very well almost all the time.
Coincidentally today is maybe the third time I've went to watch something and it's been broken. It's annoying yes, but soooo much less annoying that constant ads. It's a minor pain point that is easily solved by temporarily switching back to regular youtube.. by the time I've seen a few ads I'm more annoyed at the regular experience and NewPipe probably has a fix out by then anyway.
Youtube API's change frequently, but rarely in backwards incompatible ways.
After all, youtube runs on millions of client devices which can't or won't update the client application. Eg. Android devices with google play broken or logged out. Forcing those users to update in many cases will lose a user. A 5+ year old phone's copy of youtube still runs and plays videos.
Now the API's that the website uses... those can be updated with nearly zero notice...
I have been playing around with NewPipe SponsorBlock. It has its flaws but generally seems to work. I have not seen it mentioned but NewPipe SB also supports Soundcloud, Bandcamp and PeerTube instances. I think it includes FramaSoft's and CCC's PeerTube instances as presets. It is interesting how smoothly PeerTube seems to work.
I would not rely on NewPipe for downloading or playing YouTube videos, even when it is "fixed", but the app does much more than just those two things.
0.20.2 is working for me (at least it's working enough that videos can be played and downloaded). Even in newpipe I prefer to download videos rather than stream them. VLC is a far better player, fewer ads, fewer distractions, zero comments, and what videos I re-watch and how often isn't being logged by google.
"Until then, devs should at least be aware that building a product with these APIs is risky."
To be fair, building products with Google APIs is also risky. Google used to offer a YouTube API for free. People like me used it for personal use. Then one day Google unilaterally decided to discontinue it.^1 There are other examples of APIs that Google has changed or deprecated then discontinued.
1. To me, this is the great disadvantage of "web APIs". A "web API" is like a non-public version of a public website that the operator can easily limit access to or shut down at any time, without affecting the public website. Arguably the public-facing website is more difficult and less likely to suddenly change or shut down than a "web API". Given a choice between retrieving public data/information from a "web API" versus from the pages of a public website (or wherever the pages source their contents), I prefer the later.
Building any sort of web-based business dependent on some irreplaceable third party, such as Google, is risky.^2 When the third party makes a decision that affects someone else's dependent business, there is usually nothing the business owner can do. We see stories about this on HN from time to time. This is a control issue, folks. It is what happens when people voluntarily cede control to a third party intermediary.
2. Is it worth the risk? That is another question.
One difference between something like this free JS library on Github and an "official" Google API is that we can edit and adapt the JS library if the structure or content of YouTube's video page template changes, whereas if a YouTube API is changed or discontinued, we can do nothing. (Except complain, which rarely ever results in an API being restored.)
There used to be a free YouTube API. I had scripts that used it. Today I use the video page's HTML and JSON, not an API. (I more or less make an API for myself.) Unlike the script I once used with YouTube's API that is now useless, the script I use today keep working for the long-term. I have only had to change it twice in the last decade. These were very small changes that only took a short time to fix. (It seems like folks wait much longer for fixes to youtube-dl.)
[0]: https://www.youtube.com/static?template=terms