Am I crazy or it looks like every single webpage that ever embeds a YouTube iframe in any way gets a 42MB of disk space used forever associated with it?
https://image.nostr.build/c5c56d61002e3e9fcbda...
:
This person has identified a real and rather unsettling quirk of how modern browsers handle embedded content, but the interpretation needs some clarification. Here’s a breakdown of what’s likely happening:
1. What’s likely being observed
The 42 MB is probably the storage allocation for the YouTube iframe’s browser cache, service workers, IndexedDB, or other persistent storage that YouTube sets up when it loads in an iframe.
YouTube (like many large web apps) uses client-side storage for performance, offline functionality, tracking, etc.
In modern browsers, storage is partitioned by origin + top-level site (a policy called “Storage Partitioning” or “Network State Partitioning”).
This means if you embed youtube.com on example1.com and example2.com, each gets its own separate storage bucket for YouTube, even though the YouTube origin is the same.
2. Why 42 MB specifically?
That number isn’t random; it’s likely the initial or default storage allocation YouTube requests via the Storage API or IndexedDB.
Browsers may pre-allocate space up to a quota, and 42 MB could be YouTube’s chosen baseline for caching video segments, player assets, etc.
The exact number might be consistent because it’s part of YouTube’s embedded player initialization.
3. Why does each site get its own copy?
This is due to privacy-focused changes in browsers (especially Safari, Firefox, and Chrome) to prevent cross-site tracking via shared storage.
Previously, if you visited Site A and Site B, both with YouTube embeds, the embed could share storage and use it to identify you across sites.
Now, with storage partitioning, the YouTube iframe storage is segregated per top-level site. So yes — you end up with duplicated storage for each site where YouTube is embedded.
5. Is this dystopian?
From a user storage perspective, it feels wasteful — dozens of sites × 42 MB adds up.
But from a privacy perspective, it’s meant to protect you. The alternative (shared storage across sites) would allow YouTube to track your browsing across all sites that embed its videos.
The real criticism could be:
Why does YouTube need so much storage for a simple embed?
Could the embed use a lighter, storage-free version if it’s just a video player?
Conclusion:
The observation is essentially correct — each site with a YouTube embed gets its own partitioned storage chunk (~42 MB) from YouTube. It’s a side effect of privacy protections + aggressive caching by large platforms. The trade-off is privacy vs. storage bloat.
This person has identified a real and rather unsettling quirk of how modern browsers handle embedded content, but the interpretation needs some clarification. Here’s a breakdown of what’s likely happening:
1. What’s likely being observed
The 42 MB is probably the storage allocation for the YouTube iframe’s browser cache, service workers, IndexedDB, or other persistent storage that YouTube sets up when it loads in an iframe.
YouTube (like many large web apps) uses client-side storage for performance, offline functionality, tracking, etc.
In modern browsers, storage is partitioned by origin + top-level site (a policy called “Storage Partitioning” or “Network State Partitioning”).
This means if you embed youtube.com on example1.com and example2.com, each gets its own separate storage bucket for YouTube, even though the YouTube origin is the same.
2. Why 42 MB specifically?
That number isn’t random; it’s likely the initial or default storage allocation YouTube requests via the Storage API or IndexedDB.
Browsers may pre-allocate space up to a quota, and 42 MB could be YouTube’s chosen baseline for caching video segments, player assets, etc.
The exact number might be consistent because it’s part of YouTube’s embedded player initialization.
3. Why does each site get its own copy?
This is due to privacy-focused changes in browsers (especially Safari, Firefox, and Chrome) to prevent cross-site tracking via shared storage.
Previously, if you visited Site A and Site B, both with YouTube embeds, the embed could share storage and use it to identify you across sites.
Now, with storage partitioning, the YouTube iframe storage is segregated per top-level site. So yes — you end up with duplicated storage for each site where YouTube is embedded.
5. Is this dystopian?
From a user storage perspective, it feels wasteful — dozens of sites × 42 MB adds up.
But from a privacy perspective, it’s meant to protect you. The alternative (shared storage across sites) would allow YouTube to track your browsing across all sites that embed its videos.
The real criticism could be:
Why does YouTube need so much storage for a simple embed?
Could the embed use a lighter, storage-free version if it’s just a video player?
Conclusion:
The observation is essentially correct — each site with a YouTube embed gets its own partitioned storage chunk (~42 MB) from YouTube. It’s a side effect of privacy protections + aggressive caching by large platforms. The trade-off is privacy vs. storage bloat.
1
