When you share a YouTube video using the share button it adds “si=some_unique_code” to the URL. If you don’t remove that it shows your personal account to anyone who receives it so that they can chat directly with you. For a lot of people this is their real name.

I’ve seen it all over Lemmy so I figured I’d mention it here! You only need the stuff before the question mark in the URL to let others see the video.

This can also be turned off in your YouTube settings under the privacy section. The setting is “channel visibility for shared links”. It will still add the si code for tracking though.

top 99 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 38 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

Always remove those search parameters before pasting links, even to my friends. F—k these big tech platforms, I'm not giving you any sharing data!

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    Same here, the awful thing is if they click on it, they cannot see the comments under the video and can only "reply" to you. Not sure what that should do, since the link has already been shared.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 34 points 3 months ago (12 children)

    The frequency with which I've seen the si attribute included in youtube links has made me painfully aware of just how many people are not using the internet the same way I do; they're experiencing the internet through a handful of mobile apps, not through a web browser on the desktop.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    Even then.. what proportion of people do you think know the parts of a URL? Or know what a URL even is...

    You may be in a bubble, friend

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    I know all this stuff and even I don't look at the technical stuff in the URL. I just make sure it doesn't have dQw4w9WgXcQ in there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 32 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    On android, urlcheck is a great app to modify URLs before sharing or opening. For this problem, you can use the json editor, and add the following two entries with small a regex I wrote:

      "shorten Youtube": {
        "regex": "^https?:\/\/(?:[a-z0-9-]+\\.)*?youtube\\.com\/(.*)&.*",
        "replacement": [
          "https:\/\/youtube.com\/$1"
        ],
        "enabled": true
      },
      "shorten Youtu.be": {
        "regex": "^https?:\/\/(?:[a-z0-9-]+\\.)*?youtu\\.be\/([^?]*)?.*",
        "replacement": [
          "https:\/\/youtube.com\/watch?v=$1"
        ],
        "enabled": true
      },
    

    A button to shorten the link appears in urkcheck when the pattern matches. You can all auto shorten them by replacing "enabled": true
    With
    "automatic": true

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago

    Wow. This is awesome. Thank you! I will have to see if the dev has a donate button.

    FWIW I had to noodle with the spacing of your json after copying from Lemmy (Voyager android app) but I got it to work. Thanks for sharing!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 55 points 3 months ago (9 children)

    Pipepipe does not include this tracking, by default.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (4 children)

    Hopefully NewPipe does the same, as PipePipe's successor.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    I'm preeeeety sure PipePipe is the successor. Or atleast a different fork with more updates.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

    You are correct. Or, rather, not the successor but an independent fork (doesn't necessarily adopt upstream changes).

    I don't know what the hell I saw just the other day. I am 100% certain that I read that some GitHub project I was looking at said it was a fork of PipePipe, or in reverse, that "you should use NewPipe as it supersedes this repo".

    🤨 I need to dive into my browser history...

    Edit: ah! It was PipePipe! I just misinterpreted this line:

    NewPipe, reimagined: faster, more stable, and packed with more features.

    I took this to mean:

    NewPipe is a reimagined fork of this project, which is faster, more stable, and packed with more features.

    🤦‍♂️💁‍♂️ D'oh.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 22 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    til people don't reflexively strip out everything after the ? unless you know exactly what it's doing

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 20 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    It would be great if link cleaning and auto-mirroring was part of the lemmy UI itself.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 19 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)
  • [–] 16 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    It should be common practice if you commonly share links. Try removing the query string (everything after and including the question mark). See if you get to the same page. If you do, don’t use the query string.

    Query string parameters are rather often used for tracking. Look for gclid parameters after you click a google ad, for example.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    The harder ones to bypass are Facebook and Reddit share URLs, which give zero indicator of their destination; it seems impossible as the recipient of such a URL.

    At least with bit.ly, one can add a + to the end of the URL and see data on it, including the original link (to then safely access without adding to its click counter).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    Yeah, there are always ways… any service could easily generate unique paths that require a server-supplied redirection to the main target. Then the server just needs to stitch up (1) where was that link generated and (2) who arrived at the redirection page. Users would have no way to determine the target link without exposing themselves to being tracked.

    A platform like Reddit can do this too, by replacing the links you put in your comments/post, so they redirect to the original link. They can even make it continue displaying the original link, while actually linking to the redirect page.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Right, I've seen Slickdeals and I think Bing eventually take that on over the years: on-mouse-hover shows the original link, temporarily, until you actually right-click and copy, at which point the evil reveals itself lol.

    Hmm... now I wonder if a browser add-on could circumvent the right-click interaction and stealth-copy the originally displayed link... lol, it's nuts how far into the weeds of privacy our guerrilla warfare has been getting.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Here's another. If the video you want to share is on youtube, it's also on invidious. Without ads, downloadable and just generally none of youtube's bullshit. It even uses the same video vURL address.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    tbh I would still prefer receiving the raw youtube link so everybody can redirect it to their preferred way of watching e.g. Morphee. Invidious instances can go down or stop working.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 3 points 3 months ago* (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Me neither. Even tried to host it locally at home it the hopes that a private IP would go under googles radar, but after a month or so they blocked me as well. Same goes for LibreTube NewPipe and what not. All just fail on me after a while. The only way is to make it usable with uBlock + Unhook and Morphee Patches on Android. Its honestly not a bad experience except for the added setTimeout when Youtube notices. :)

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    On my forum, youtube links get stripped of any extra url parameters. Every site should have to do that.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    That's a great extra layer of protection, but people shouldn't rely on it and get/stay in the habit of always removing the tracking code themselves.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Yeah, it's easily possible to set it up to save the original link somewhere hidden. Same reason why you shouldn't reuse passwords because it's trivial to set up a site to look like it's doing it right from the outside but actually saves all passwords in plaintext for owners, admins, or disgruntled staff to look at later and see if it logs in to your email.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 31 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    I remember telling this to people on reddit and getting downvoted to oblivion while redditors squawked "who tf cares bro"

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    We set up a bot on r/asmr to reply to anyone posting a YouTube link containing the "si=" parameter, warning that it was likely a tracking ID that Google could potentially use to tie their YouTube account to their Reddit account with some degree of probability and suggesting that they delete their post and re-post without the si= parameter. Many were grateful for the warning and info but some didn't care. We decided to disable the warning after a few weeks.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago

    Since 4 March 2026 I am seeing "is=" in some YouTube links instead of "si=", also with the 16 character ID.

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    Additional PSA: TikTok does the same. Also Instagram, but in my experience it doesn't reveal the sharing user (yet).

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Facebook and Instagram do the same btw. Just FYI.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago (8 children)

    Not sure if my anxiety is justified here, but I am not tech savvy whatsoever. And I worry about all the things I’m doing that’s probably completely giving myself away that I’m just unaware of. I didn’t know about this at all.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    pretty much everything that has a "share" button does this. it's not to help you share the link more easily than copying from the address bar - it's to harvest your data

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    Even voyager gives a link to vger.to when you hit share instead of a direct link to the thing you want to share. No idea what they are doing with it (other than trying to redirect it to the app). Maybe it's set up to just use the localhost and that's all it does, but I usually strip that part out because I have no idea either way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    vger.to solely exists so i can text dumb memes to my non tech inclined friends, and they open in voyager on their device instead of the web.

    It’s a dumb service and has zero analytics other than cpu disk bandwidth use lol

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Yeah you can change default in Settings, or if you’re sharing a post you can long press the share icon in the post bar right under the post to select on demand

    voyager event supports sharing via author, community, or your own instance.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Yeah, this is why that vger.to link is so annoying for me (other than triggering the reaction to the dark pattern, even if it isn't exploiting it like what seems to be the industry standard these days), because most of the time when I use the share thing, I'm really just trying to get the url to open it in my browser, so that "open in voyager" link is the exact opposite of what I want, though I can see how it might be nice for actually sharing the link with others.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 3 months ago (10 children)

    I just share the URL from the browser.

    Even on mobile: I don't use the YouTube app. On Android, this is a no-brainer, since you can run Firefox and uBlock Origin and bypass all the ads. On iOS it is a bit more dicey, but still advantageous to forego the app. Currently DuckDuckGo can bypass the ads for free. If you don't mind paying, Wipr2 can also do it, in Safari. Then you just put a web shortcut to YouTube and bam, ad-free YouTube. Shitty icon though (it's the regular icon in a white squircle). Either way, share from the browser, not YouTube.

    Also, of course you can remove all the extra shit from the URL if you know how. That wisdom is lost on younger generations, but innate to older ones (who grew up around tech, like Millennials; or younger Gen X who adopted it at a young age — not like these iPad babies you have now).

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (9 children)

    I don't see how it's a generational thing. I remember when every link included the page type at the end, meaning there was nothing that could be truncated. If you don't know what si stands for or don't know that anything after a ? Is tracking bullshit, then you simply don't know. It's a "knowledgeable person" thing that can be learned at any time. I've pointed it out and many people I know still don't care

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    As a web developer, everything after the ? is actually parameters for the request. Anything could be in there, even important stuff (though hopefully nothing identifying, since that is extremely unsecure). You will likely break functionality if you delete everything without knowing what it is.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Usually parameters are easy to understand. Like the time parameter in yt URLs, which is t=180 (meaning 180 seconds from the beginning of the video). Usually, parameters that are a string of seemingly random letters are UIDs or tracking parameters. Whenever I see a URL with one or multiple of those, I start deleting them and seeing if the URL still works. In 90% of the cases, it still does. Amazon is one of the worst offenders, with usually 4 or 5 random looking parameters that can be deleted without affecting the functionality of the URL.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 child)

    I don’t see how it’s a generational thing.

    People who grew up when smartphones were already a thing might never have needed to learn how the Internet and URLs actually work. To a lot of everyday users nowadays, the Internet is just a series of smartphone or tablet apps you switch between. I used to think that the spread of the Internet into more segments of society would create a society of computer nerds, ha ha ha ha ha nope.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    Sample the people around you in real life. They don't know any better, regardless of age. The group that experienced it has already largely forgotten it because the link purpose got obfuscated and the need became obsolete in everyday use

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago* (2 children)

    People can't even unanimously agree on when each generation starts and ends (see terms like "zillenial" or "xillenial") so I'd even go so far as to say it's a completely redundant concept in the colloquial sense. Obviously most people care more about continuing to use the "kids these days" rhetoric so it hardly matters regardless, but it doesn't make it any less ridiculous.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    Blurry deliberations are typical. As time goes on, "millennial" will become more accurate as the differences between xennial and zillennial become smaller and smaller in comparison to differences between _ennial and alpha or beta or delta. I just take issue with acting like direct url interface was the experience of a generation, and not a short-lived blip for the gen pop that has already been forgotten, especially as full url purpose has shifted to something arguably evil.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    Blurry deliberations are typical.

    Yes, though my point that I wanted to add is that people seem to treat generational terms as if they’re a fact of reality instead of a very shaky conceptualization of cultural differences between birth groups that are already influenced by a lot more factors than just when people are born. It’s much more of a spectrum than a strict range of demographics inherent to humanity.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    You should also known that TikTok does this by default and the generated code is impossible to remove afaik, it's part of the video identifier.

    So when sharing a tiktok video always download it and share the file.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 5 points 3 months ago

    I never knew users could get the profile from it, I always thought that was a youtube internal thing. thats not cool

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago

    Done. Thank you.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago
    [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    If it helps, for Androids share YT link to something like Untracker to remove unwanted nonsense from the url which you can then pass on safely (also works for things such as Amazon links).

    For images, share to something such as Imagepipe first to remove location data. Other apps such as Aves Libre gallery or image Toolbox also strip this data but Imagepipe is simple - share image to it & it passes the image directly to your messaging app after stripping the data

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Might not solve everything, but a good link cleaner utility is helpful too. I personally use this one: Trackless Links

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    i have never shared a youtube vid while logged in

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    FYI on desktop you can right click on the video and select "Copy video URL", it doesn't include the tracker string. Wish they'd let us remove it from the Share button, I've simply removed that button with uBlock Origin.

    It's also missing from my patched YouTube app's Share on Android, not sure if that's one of the patches.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    If you never sign into YouTube and sharing links from a third party application, what is it that they append? Curious what makes up that shared id.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    I use this on Android to sanitise links I sent out as well as clean incoming links before viewing them.

    https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.svenjacobs.app.leon

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    It can't share my personal account if I'm never signed in.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    I share everything through URLCheck on Android. You can also set it as your default browser to clean every link you click as well.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    https://f-droid.org/packages/com.svenjacobs.app.leon

    I use this, and it works really well for the big apps and services.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago

    That app seems not as transparent as it could be since it doesnt give any detail on the removed stuff; I recommend URLCheck instead, which is fully transparent about all trackers and even lets you pick which ones to remove at will.

  • source
  • parent