Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

PeerTube, the “Decentralized YouTube”, succeeds in crowdfunding

quariety.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 305 posts

Re: PeerTube, the “Decentralized YouTube”, succeeds in crowdfunding

#191

Post by cyphar »

themagician wrote: post #177
wongarsu wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Fake news.

I'm sorry, have you been on YouTube recently? You're talking about it as though the last time you saw anyone talking about the behind the scenes of being a YouTuber was 2009. Things have changed in the meantime, and not for the better.

Re: PeerTube, the “Decentralized YouTube”, succeeds in crowdfunding

#192

Post by wetpaws »

albertgoeswoof wrote: post #188
wetpaws wrote: post #148

I am concerned that federated service is being presented as distributed. Email is federated and it is precisely the reason why nobody is hosting their mail server and using Gmail instead.

Nobody except literally every sizeable corporation, the hundreds of gmail competitors and the millions that host their own server.

Just for the sake of curiousity, where do you store your mail?

Re: PeerTube, the “Decentralized YouTube”, succeeds in crowdfunding

#193

Post by altfredd »

themagician wrote: post #169
smnplk wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another point of decentralised services is cutting out the middleman and this is what should be appealing to content creators.

Not really. Content creators often look for middlemen to represent them. That's why they join networks that works directly with YouTube. Most of the views to people who do YouTube as a job. When you look on that trending list, 90% of those videos are people waking up and going to a job. The last thing they want is more bosses and more logistics.

> Content creators often look for middlemen to represent them.

Oh boy. Bees are looking for badgers?!

Content creators are looking for support and high reliability. "The middleman" can sometimes deliver those things... Until they suddenly boot you out, because their algorithm determined, that your videos don't deliver enough bucks in advertising revenue to keep them afloat.

Of course, "the algorithm" is merely poor excuse for carefully orchestrated scenario, which might have as well resulted from manual intervention (and most famous precedents are indeed backed by staff-approved decisions). Google have put great deal of effort into pretending, that their services have no support teams and no living humans behind them, but in practice places like YouTube are censored to hell and back, — and all of that censorship happens at expense of "content creators".

Re: PeerTube, the “Decentralized YouTube”, succeeds in crowdfunding

#194

Post by knuththetruth »

annabellish wrote: post #45
willio58 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Podcasts are, for the most part, decentralized and seem to be still booming in popularity. I don’t see why a decentralized video platform couldn’t work too.

Other than the much smaller scales podcasts operate on, are there any podcasts where the host has turned it into a living? There's a _lot_ of video creators out there who make those videos as their sole source of income now.

The Chapo Trap House guys make a 100k per month with their podcast.

https://www.patreon.com/chapotraphouse

Re: PeerTube, the “Decentralized YouTube”, succeeds in crowdfunding

#195

Post by AndrewUnmuted »

ReverseCold wrote: post #40
themagician wrote: post #2

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…

The biggest thing holding back p2p/"truly decentralized" networks (in my opinion) are NAT/Firewalls. You cannot reliably get past them on the inside without manual configuration. There's no way you can convince millions of people to try to port forward, and UPnP is very hit or miss. If that was solved, lightweight applications like 1:1 messaging could easily be fully peer to peer/decentralized/trustless.

This is an interesting thought. Even more interesting was what I learned recently while trying to circumvent this issue.

Last week I encountered a similar concern in a project I am working on for UWP. I wasn't sure how to help the user open up the necessary ports. Then I discovered that one can submit in the UWP application manifest the port ranges that the app needs to function properly.

Whenever a user installs the app, the Windows Firewall tool opens a dialog asking if it should open the port ranges.

As someone who typically works in Unix derived environments, this was a delightful surprise.

Re: PeerTube, the “Decentralized YouTube”, succeeds in crowdfunding

#196

Post by anderspitman »

If PeerTube accomplishes nothing but making it easy for a person to host their own videos in a way that can be streamed scalably, in my opinion it will be a very valuable piece of software. I wonder how many seed boxes you'd need in order to guarantee video availability. I'm assuming after you get enough people watching at one time that webtorrents become self-sustaining, correct?

Re: PeerTube, the “Decentralized YouTube”, succeeds in crowdfunding

#197

Post by progval »

themagician wrote: post #159
resters wrote: post #144

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…

> Build another centralized service that fixes the problems that YouTube has,

Then just create a huge PeerTube instance, and you'll get the benefits of both worlds.

Plus, you'll pay for less bandwidth than Youtube.

Re: PeerTube, the “Decentralized YouTube”, succeeds in crowdfunding

#198

Post by charlchi »

hueving wrote: post #140
tehduder9 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really grinding when any criticism isn't addressed but complained about for being pointed out.

It's not criticism. It's reactionary conjecture about why people are using YouTube without any evidence to back it up.

This. If everyone in the tech industry adopted a "X works and many people use it, so we shouldn't try to make Y work" then you can say goodbye to progress. Specifically, some of us don't want the internet to serve as an interactive billboard, where our interactions with billboards are monitored. 99% of users probably don't care but being part of the next generation of software engineers I want to build things that influences people lives more positively than the previous generation of tech. I honestly question the moral integrity of my fellow technologists. There's a massive gap some commenters are missing between looking at the outcome of a model and the technical or conceptual changes it could undergo over time. Just because something has been working for 5/10 years doesn't mean it's the only proven way nor do we need to enforce it as the "proven ©" status quo for everyone else because we're too afraid of technical changes.

Re: PeerTube, the “Decentralized YouTube”, succeeds in crowdfunding

#199

Post by charlchi »

DEADBEEFC0FFEE wrote: post #182
meko wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've noticed this and wonder why it is... Maybe developers /engineers are prone to seeking out, trying to identify constraints?

There probably less incentive or pressure to comment if you agree. If you disagree, you presumably have an opposing view and rationale which you may be compelled to share.

Criticising a technology for it's tech is one thing. Claiming that "X won't work because Y always works" casually but authoritatively isn't really criticism. And you can see a lot of people here getting upset over casual but massive sweeping statements like that without backup.

Re: PeerTube, the “Decentralized YouTube”, succeeds in crowdfunding

#200

Post by notatoad »

resters wrote: post #144
themagician wrote: post #2

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…

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…

>Content creators simply want a platform for gathering an audience

content creators want to get paid. If all the content creators wanted was a platform to gather an audience, being demonetized wouldn't be the end of the world that they all seem to claim it is.

those ads youtube plays don't just fund youtube, they fund the content creators too. the interests of the platform and the producer are pretty closely aligned there.

Post reply on HN