171–180 of 305 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People made this argument about cars when they were still riding horseback. Let's not defend the worse thing here.
Handwaving away criticism by saying, "People in the past have been wrong about things before" isn't really addressing anything.
I already addressed it.
Without censorship, decentralized products can thrive. And they currently are.
HN's response was "but they're not very big!!!1!"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nothing about any of that couldn't happen on a decentralised/federated network. The drama could obviously happen, though likely about different issues to those on YouTube. The discoverability could happen on a decentralised system, as could ad money/subscription payments, recommendations or anything else. Nothing about what makes someone successful on a site like YouTube needs it to be centralised to be possible.
It's not impossible, but I think it's way, way less likely. The thing with YouTube alternatives is that they have to be at least as good as YouTube. Creators will only go where their audiences will go, so a site that doesn't offer a good user experience will immediately be off the table. Discoverability is way harder on decentralized systems, as is providing recommendations, stability, etc. Sometimes HN/reddit gets s…
That's the irony with decentralized services.
Your entire architecture depends on people participating in it. When you make it as humanly cumbersome as possible for people to actually participate, you will not have any infrastructure.
I've seen worms and botnets that were better architected than that. Recruiting and participation were done right, and made easy ;)
'decentralisation' should not be a design goal, or at least should not be advertised as one, because it is fundamentally unsustainable. It is best understood as a transitional phase between centralized regimes, not an end in and of itself.
I don’t know man - the Internet is distributed and last I checked it was doing great.
What the people who want decentralized services don't realize is that the content creators want centralized services (whether they realize it or not). In the old days we needed YouTube because you needed a Flash encoder if you wanted to make video accessible on the web to everyone. Now anyone can host video on anything. You can throw even throw some comments on the bottom if you want. But what those who create want i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your assumptions are completely wrong. Content creators simply want a platform for gathering an audience. Youtube wants to play as many ads as possible. Let's not pretend that somehow those interests align perfectly in the product we know as youtube. The audience generation mechanics are an important ingredient for replacing youtube, but youtube has gone from being a free service that had little user generated conten…
I'm not wrong. We have moved towards a world of centralized services because that's what people want. To many people it's the centralized services that "are" the Internet: YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram—that's it. YouTube is the lowest common denominator of video. You aren't going to "fix" its problems with a more complex decentralized network. If you want to solve the problems with YouTube you have to do it w…
Almost there. People want INTEROPERABLE services. If that occurs because one place has a monopoly, that’s okay. If everyone can participate across any platform they choose that has the features they want (privacy, a close knit community, etc) that’s better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Until someone puts a bunch of kiddie porn up there. If there's not a reasonable way to take it down, that's a huge issue. Then the absence of censorship might lead to it's downfall.
There's plenty of kiddie porn on facebook, instagram, twitter. They hide it other images or scramble the images themselves to fool filters. Or did you think that magically goes away because it's centralized? GS instances have ways to block content instance-wide. So spam and porn filters can catch items and prevent all users on the instance from seeing it. I don't know if ActivityPub specifies things like that in the…
"Incredibly, nobody needs to be censored. "
This is flat out not true. Kiddie porn and spam, for instance.
"The offending poster can be reported to authorities and handled from there without ever having to tell a user what they can and cannot post."
Except you're still telling people what not to post. The problem is that you're not allowing for a way to prevent that in the first place.
What the people who want decentralized services don't realize is that the content creators want centralized services (whether they realize it or not). In the old days we needed YouTube because you needed a Flash encoder if you wanted to make video accessible on the web to everyone. Now anyone can host video on anything. You can throw even throw some comments on the bottom if you want. But what those who create want i…
youtube is great for building an audience, but not nessesarily good for keeping it. A lot of niches have great success with patreon, but great trouble with keeping their videos on youtube (and in some cases keeping them in their subscribers feeds even when they are not taken down). The issues range from youtube's automatic enforcement of content guidelines (which appears more or less random), their ever increasing st…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your assumptions are completely wrong. Content creators simply want a platform for gathering an audience. Youtube wants to play as many ads as possible. Let's not pretend that somehow those interests align perfectly in the product we know as youtube. The audience generation mechanics are an important ingredient for replacing youtube, but youtube has gone from being a free service that had little user generated conten…
I'm not wrong. We have moved towards a world of centralized services because that's what people want. To many people it's the centralized services that "are" the Internet: YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram—that's it. YouTube is the lowest common denominator of video. You aren't going to "fix" its problems with a more complex decentralized network. If you want to solve the problems with YouTube you have to do it w…
You could have made a parallel argument, before Youtube, about how people wanted only professional content, why a service for user created content would never work etc, because that's all that had worked, up to that point.
Just because all the decentralized projects have failed so far doesn't mean they are doomed.
Its really early days yet. Youtube is just over a decade old. HBO is 5 decades old. Clearly decentralized services are harder to build and get right. But that means there's still plenty to figure out, and plenty of potential.
> YouTube's audience doesn't care about anything at decentralized network has to offer. It's just entertainment for them. They just want to watch videos and shitpost in the comments.
People change, they grow in sophistication. E.g. look at Facebook - at the start it was full of spammy viral activity notifications for crappy games. People got sick of that and it was forced to change. Now its full of other crappy stuff, but which people are getting sick of now too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Contact the peertube host. If they choose to leave it up, you can contact law enforcement / a court who can make a genuine judgement as to the legality of the content and take up approrpriate enforcement.
How do peertube hosts pick what to host? Do they manually curate everything?
But Politics and Porn? These taboo subjects will be hard to deal with in a federated environment.
[1] https://www.helm.sh/ [2] https://kubernetes.io/ [3] https://cloud.google.com/kubernetes-engine/