Show HN: If YouTube had actual channels

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

A small web project that turns YouTube videos into 12 always-on, genre-based “channels” has struck a chord with people who miss the simplicity of old-school TV. Commenters praise the hand-curated, synchronized streams and the inability to pause or choose specific videos for reducing decision fatigue and recreating the serendipity of channel surfing. Many now want similar experiences on TVs and streaming platforms, while others point to related tools and raise questions about long-term curation, creator credit, and the risk of ads or platform restrictions undermining the concept.

Overall Reception

  • Very positive reaction; many describe it as “addictive,” “mesmerizing,” and “surprisingly compelling” once tried.
  • Several say it’s the best thing they’ve seen in a while and bookmark it for repeated use.
  • A minority explicitly dislike the TV‑like experience or find it equivalent to “doomscrolling” with less control.

Nostalgia and UX

  • Strong nostalgia for 80s/90s channel surfing: limited choices, serendipitous discovery, and shared “everyone’s watching the same thing” feeling.
  • People enjoy dropping into the middle of videos, skipping intros and “like/subscribe” fluff.
  • The “always running” streams and FOMO of missing content make it feel more like real TV and, paradoxically, more relaxing than on‑demand choice.

Channel Model & Curation

  • Channels are topic‑based (science, travel, food, documentaries, music, etc.), with videos hand‑picked and scheduled so all viewers see the same thing at the same time.
  • Some worry manual curation may not scale or will stagnate; others suggest search‑based or community‑driven channel lists.
  • Users request more genres (sports, kids, DIY/maker, game shows, local/hobbyist, cartoons).

Desired Features vs. Simplicity

  • Common requests: TV guide/schedule, channel labels, per‑channel permalinks, direct links to the current YouTube video, captions, volume and quality controls, keyboard/remote controls, app versions (TV, Roku, Fire TV, PWA), language filters, and personalization (e.g., based on subscriptions or keywords).
  • Several argue against feature creep; they value the minimal, non‑interactive, non‑algorithmic feel.

Technical / Implementation Notes

  • Implemented as static HTML/CSS/JS with YouTube iframes; no backend beyond a file server.
  • A list.json file provides per‑channel schedules and is refreshed when needed.
  • Static “snow” transition is widely liked for atmosphere but criticized for tiling, repetition, and eye strain; some want it tunable or removable.
  • Some report issues with autoplay blockers, certain browsers, SSL errors, or buffering.

Comparisons and Alternatives

  • Compared to old broadcast/cable, SiriusXM, radio, Netflix’s former “shuffle”/linear channel, Pluto TV, Shudder linear channels, Plex/Jellyfin + ErsatzTV/DizqueTV/QuasiTV, retro TV sites, and TikTok/Shorts.
  • Many see it as a better discovery layer on top of YouTube’s catalog than YouTube’s own UI.

Concerns & Broader Reflections

  • Worries about ads, monetization pressure, and possible YouTube policy conflicts or blocking.
  • Some raise ethics of crediting creators more clearly and relying on YouTube’s ad/compensation system.
  • Thread includes broader reflections on decision fatigue, recommendation algorithms, loss of shared culture, and the appeal of “turn it on and don’t choose” media.