606
submitted 5 months ago by boem@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] cRazi_man@lemm.ee 62 points 5 months ago

Good. This is how YouTube dies. This is how Google dies. This is how competitors/alternatives are born. Stop fighting to make Google services useable against every effort of theirs. Let them drive people away to make (or discover) alternatives.

[-] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 41 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Do you have any idea how many billions with a B it would take to even start a viable, proper competitor to youtube? and how quickly that capital B could end up becoming a Capital T?

I hate people who keep screaming about let youtube die and alternatives will be born.

Youtube has been shit for years. No ones made an alternative that is viable.

Any an all alternatives are subscription based services, and tiny. Like Floatplane, Utreon and whatever the gunfocused one is that I cant remember off the top of my head, if it even still exists.

Anyone that has that kinda money are probably already in bed with googles capitalistic hellscape ideals for hte internet and not interested in going against them.

Creating competitors for things like Reddit and Facebook are relatively easy. Creating a competitor for something that probably accumulates hundreds of terabytes, if not more, per hour? That takes insane amounts of storage, and bandwidth, and overhead, and everything else that costs more than any regular person could ever have a hope of even having a wet dream over.

[-] myrrh@ttrpg.network 19 points 5 months ago

...i think pornhub's leaving money on the table not starting a SFW video platform...

[-] awesome_lowlander@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 5 months ago

Users spend hours on YT, and 30 secs on PH. They'd have to scale their infrastructure up massively.

[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 months ago

Look at this guy and his whole 30s

[-] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

considering pornhubs history of legal troubles, I doubt they are much inclined.

[-] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

If you tried to create a centralized one? Yeah, it would take a lot. Would a decentralized one be as expensive? I'm not sure.

I think the best goal would be to try to create a platform for creators that has a low barrier to entry - both in terms of cost and skill - that gives them the ability to easily and quickly set up a "channel" to "broadcast" from and earn some revenue somehow.

Why build one competitor to YouTube when we could build a billion of them?

[-] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Why build one competitor to YouTube when we could build a billion of them?

Because thats the very reason why people hate current streaming services, and you're arguing to not only make it worse than that, but to make the end users eat the costs of storage and bandwidth.

[-] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 11 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

You don't understand why people hate streaming fragmentation.

You can have a billion decentralized openyoutube all on the same page, just look how lemmy already does it.

Podcast also did it with RSS. Agglomeration isn't an issue on a decentralized open platform

[-] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago

If they shared the same protocol, or at least reasonably compatible versions of it, you could have one app that does all of them.

[-] joshhsoj1902@lemmy.ca 7 points 5 months ago

The protocol isn't the hard part. It's the monetizing that is. Creators aren't looking to provide content for free, especially if they are also now paying for hosting costs.

Ad spots (like Google does) work well because they can inject an up to date ad into an old video. In something like the fedeverse today a creators only option would be ads baked into the video, but they would only get paid for that up front which isn't ideal...

[-] alsimoneau@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 months ago

Sponsors pay much more than views. So does patrons.

The true issue is discoverability in my opinion.

[-] joshhsoj1902@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Sponsors pay more upfront. If creators are only using sponsors than their whole back catalogue is basically valueless. If it costs a creator 2-10 cents a month to host a video (based off S3 pricing), but they only made 1000$ on it upfront when the video was made, overtime the back catalogue becomes a pretty significant financial burden if it's not being monetized

Also it's worth keeping in mind that many people are also using tools to autoskip sponsor spots, and the only leverage creators have for being paid by sponsors are viewership numbers.

Patreon is irrelevant, that's just like Nebula, floatplane etc, it's essentially a subscription based alternative to YouTube.

Discoverability is pointless if the people discovering you aren't going to financial contribute. It's the age old "why don't you work for me for free, the exposure I provide will make it worth your time", that hasn't been true before and likely isn't here. Creators aren't looking to work for free (at least not the ones creating the high quality content we're used to today)

[-] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 2 points 5 months ago

Yet bittorrent does youtube fives times over with central governance. You have drunk too much cloud coolaid. My laptop could host my youtube channel without issue and I would still have enough juice to play counter strike and download the latest marvel slop movie.

[-] rwhitisissle@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago

Boy howdy, users sure would love to pivot to a peer distributed content system that randomly downloads chunks of a video file as they become available with speeds of anywhere between 2 bytes and 2 megabytes a second (which one you'll get depends on who you're getting the chunks from) with literally no guarantee of being able to even complete said download because the people they're downloading it from may not all have the entire file's worth of combined data across their respective computers, and they have to download the entire video before watching it to determine whether or not they even want to watch it in the first place. Also, there's no capacity for monetization without literally doing what Google is trying to do and injecting advertisements directly into the video, so there's no incentive for any content producers to use this system to distribute said content, meaning it would be a ghost town of a service from the start.

Yep, that would be a great system. /s

[-] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago

Exactly.

I'm feeling like this whole "distrubuted youtube!" argument is nothing but a variant of the blockchain fantasy. Seeing a lot of the same style of arguments and ignorance.

[-] balder1991@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

It’s a common trap for certain types of people to assume technology can fix problems that are inventive or socially driven.

[-] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Its also a common trap for idiots to grasp hold of a fraction of a fragment of an idea and think it gives them complete and total understanding, and then go around proselytizing their absolute incompetence as if its techno-gospel.

Which I think is why this distributed youtube bull follows the same general argument trend as the mythical and holy blockchain. That does nothing, but somehow can magically solve all problems.

[-] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago

We solved this problem BEFORE youtube was even a thing. Youtube only exists out of convenience for normies. Youtube can die tomorrow, we will still have unlimited video. In fact, think youtube slowed down innovation on this front. Torrent trackers are unchanged in their form from 2003. I wouldn't mind federated content, browser integration of torrent systems and locally running content recommendation system as well as social crowdsourced review systems (aka the like button and comments)

[-] kalleboo@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

To be fair, a LOT of people swear by Popcorn Time, which is exactly that. I was surprised it worked as well as it does, too.

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

Your laptop would become suicidal the second it had to start serving streaming, 4k video to dozens of people, much less hundreds or thousands.

[-] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml -1 points 5 months ago

My laptop can copy files at 15 mbps, very very easily. Hundreds ? Again piss easy, that's what bittorrents are for, even easier when the swarms takes care of all the traffic. The more people are 10 or so and the faster it will copy itself. Do you cloud people still know how to copy files or was that arcane knowledge lost to the sands of 1995 ?

[-] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I hate the cloud you perfidious incompetent. The only thing more stupid than the "cloud" is your belief that you can serve hundreds, if not thousands, of simultaneous streams,possibly 1080, most likely 4k, from your 15mbps laptop.

[-] PlutoniumAcid@lemmy.world 28 points 5 months ago

It has been THE viteo platform for literally decades. There is so much content there; it would be a tremendous effort to direct that elsewhere.

And that other site would quickly succumb to storage and bandwidth costs. What options could exist?

[-] Tixanou@lemm.ee 14 points 5 months ago

The only option left would be PeerTube if it federated with every other PeerTube instance by default, like Lemmy

[-] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 5 months ago

Wishfull thinking. Sadly the truth.
It's nearly impossible to have that high of a federation and preventing a centralization to not loose any videos (except if the creators chose so).

[-] Tixanou@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)
[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 7 points 5 months ago

Nebula is interesting. You pay for a subscription, which funds creators and platform costs.

[-] WildPalmTree@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago
[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 months ago

Yup, but no Google tracking, but they seem to do other tracking.

[-] PlutoniumAcid@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

Sounds like a survivable approach. Except: has anyone heard of it? I hadn't.

[-] mlc894@lemm.ee 4 points 5 months ago

It’s owned and populated by history and science/engineering YouTubers, so if you’re not usually watching that side of YouTube, you might not find much on Nebula for you.

[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 months ago

On the flipside, that's most of what I watch, so I hear about it all the time.

[-] calcopiritus@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

The youtubers that are on nebula place ads of it on almost every one of their videos.

If you haven't heard about nebula it's because:

  • You don't follow any nebula creators.
  • You use sponsor block.
[-] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 5 months ago
[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago

Sure, use anything that's not Youtube.

[-] joshhsoj1902@lemmy.ca 21 points 5 months ago

I fail to follow how a competitor can pop up if the main users it's attracting are ones that don't want to view ads or pay for subscriptions.

[-] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemm.ee 17 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The alternative should be libraries hosting the peoples internet.

You may balk at the idea, much like you would have at the idea of free public libraries when originally conceived.

[-] eodur@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

I like this idea so much. Do the public libraries not have some kind of video service already? Seems like a network of library-powered PeerTube instances would serve that niche really well.

[-] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 6 points 5 months ago

How can a competitor that is courting people that aren’t revenue sources compete

[-] BruceTwarzen@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago

I like youtube, i use it quite a lot. I wouldn't use it at all without ad and sponsor block. I don't know how so many people do it, it's crazy to me.

this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2024
606 points (96.5% liked)

Technology

59381 readers
1091 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS