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

How I tried to compete with YouTube and Google with Livevideo.com

techpost.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 152 posts

Re: How I tried to compete with YouTube and Google with Livevideo.com

#71

Post by dalore »

metildaa wrote: post #67
dalore wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article: > he walked away with about $50 million when News Corp purchased my space. He should have walked away with a lot more He thinks that News Corp should have paid more for myspace? Because they got so much value from it.

It does seem a bit out of proportion, News Corp bought a business that proceeded to sink. I think Peertube and other Fediverse stacks like Mastodon, Pleroma, Pixelfed & Lemmy will continue to bleed users from more traditional sites over the next few years. They've significantly lowered the barriers to running your own social site, creating a great variety of communities that otherwise would be much smaller or non-exi…

Yes, MySpace wasn't making any money if I recall and so had no real business plan. Sounds like the same like the guy complaining. They don't have real business plans to make money except an exit strategy to sell it to someone else. Their revenue was going to come from adsense? And he's complaining about google cutting him off. He should have been thinking how to make money, like his own adsense.

Re: How I tried to compete with YouTube and Google with Livevideo.com

#72

Post by TACIXAT »

Havoc wrote: post #17
TACIXAT wrote: post #11

This is interesting. I'm starting to make a computer security course right now and I've chosen to put it on pornhub. The monetization options are better for creators (I can sell videos!). Obviously, pornhub is going to restrict the audience a bit, so I've been toying with the idea of making a video hosting site with solid monetization options and categories of ads beyond porn. I think the biggest thing I don't unders…

Can't tell if serious. But just in case- ph is blocked by pretty much every corporate network in existence right. That might put a bit of a dent in which computer security experts can access the content. I suppose getting to the content by bypassing firewalls could be part of the learning experience lol

I think that is actually a feature. I want to do something for hackers, not our corporate overlords. If someone is willing to learn this stuff in their non working hours, they are probably a pretty motivated student.

Re: How I tried to compete with YouTube and Google with Livevideo.com

#73

Post by Chris_Chambers »

izzydata wrote: post #61
darkpuma wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "the big tech companies don't really touch porn." Isn't that the case because mainstream American advertisers don't want anything to do with it? I don't think it's a matter of west coast tech companies being prudes, but rather tech companies appeasing big consumer goods companies that spend billions on advertising, like P&G, J&J, PepsiCo, etc. And those companies are in turn likely appeasing 'middle america' by try…

Anyone else find it mildly strange how such a huge portion of the economy functions solely on the production and consumption of terrible products such as soda?

It’s retardation juice. You have to keep people in a permanent malnutrition-induced malaise of retardation to grease the path for them to accept all of the even worse things you want to throw at them.

Re: How I tried to compete with YouTube and Google with Livevideo.com

#74

Post by notyourday »

The product had no USP. And it was a suckier product. That's it.

It is not possible to compete with Google using Google-like business model. It is already being used by Google and Google is very good at it.

Who manages to compete with Google using a slightly different business model? Facebook. Why? Different USP. Different product.

Who else? Amazon. Why? Different USP, different product.

Who else? Pornhub. Why? Different USP, different product.

List goes on.

Re: How I tried to compete with YouTube and Google with Livevideo.com

#75

Post by TACIXAT »

Mathnerd314 wrote: post #38
TACIXAT wrote: post #11

This is interesting. I'm starting to make a computer security course right now and I've chosen to put it on pornhub. The monetization options are better for creators (I can sell videos!). Obviously, pornhub is going to restrict the audience a bit, so I've been toying with the idea of making a video hosting site with solid monetization options and categories of ads beyond porn. I think the biggest thing I don't unders…

The obvious place to put it is an online learning platform, just googling "create online course" shows a dozen different websites with various monetization options. Or you could do unlisted YouTube videos and a simple pay site. Or Vimeo has some embedding options. The main problem I see is product differentiation, e.g. MIT has a computer security course: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqmQg-cszw4&list=PLUl4u3cNGP...…

Unlisted is not very well protected. Once someone has the url, it is out there. PH at least ties the purchases to an account. Sure, someone can download and throw them on torrents, but it feels less like leaving the barn door open.

As for differentiation, simply, my course will be the best. It's designed to take you from zero to security analyst. Those MIT lectures are taught with chalk and don't lay the foundations properly. The topics are good though, cool to see something on symbolic execution.

I want to give people the background knowledge. Like buffer overflows are easy if you understand stack frames, and assembly. I want to teach that stuff first before telling someone to go stumble through an exploitation exercise. I want to do that for every topic.

Re: How I tried to compete with YouTube and Google with Livevideo.com

#76

Post by TeMPOraL »

izzydata wrote: post #61
darkpuma wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "the big tech companies don't really touch porn." Isn't that the case because mainstream American advertisers don't want anything to do with it? I don't think it's a matter of west coast tech companies being prudes, but rather tech companies appeasing big consumer goods companies that spend billions on advertising, like P&G, J&J, PepsiCo, etc. And those companies are in turn likely appeasing 'middle america' by try…

Anyone else find it mildly strange how such a huge portion of the economy functions solely on the production and consumption of terrible products such as soda?

I'm more worried about the huge supporting portion of the economy that is advertising. Seems to have much more harmful effects on everything around us, including but not limited to making people consume more terrible products such as soda than they otherwise would.

Re: How I tried to compete with YouTube and Google with Livevideo.com

#77

Post by TACIXAT »

friedegg wrote: post #19
TACIXAT wrote: post #11

This is interesting. I'm starting to make a computer security course right now and I've chosen to put it on pornhub. The monetization options are better for creators (I can sell videos!). Obviously, pornhub is going to restrict the audience a bit, so I've been toying with the idea of making a video hosting site with solid monetization options and categories of ads beyond porn. I think the biggest thing I don't unders…

I think we will eventually see VideoHub or something along those lines with a similar hosting platform from the PornHub company, just for non-porn.

Yea, maybe if I see some success on there it could encourage them to try out that model. CreatorHub or something. They do already have all the correct infrastructure for it, payments, subscriptions. If the ads were relevant it would be the perfect platform.

Re: How I tried to compete with YouTube and Google with Livevideo.com

#78

Post by tasty_freeze »

devmunchies wrote: post #32
privateSFacct wrote: post #14

This article should say - you can't compete with google using google. The "final blow" was adsense being cutoff. Their revenue model to compete with google was ... adsense. OK. Their traffic model was google search. Ok. Between the lines it sounds like some aggressive SEO, and maybe the network click bounce thing (you click on one video, and then it clicks through to another site etc). Be curious what their content m…

Haven’t used reddit in over a year and hardly visit YouTube. #1 competitor for my time is reading a book. The freedom and clarity I feel now that I’m not plugged in to these types of social networks makes me believe reddit is also “disgusting trash”.

You are painting with a very broad brush. There are tens of thousands of subreddits covering a dizzying array of topics. Many are low information garbage communities, but many are amazing resources that can't be found anywhere else.

I'm not suggesting you change your personal choice, but as someone who is a sometimes member of those communities, I resent being called trash.

Re: How I tried to compete with YouTube and Google with Livevideo.com

#79

Post by nullandvoid »

rubberstock wrote: post #64
nemothekid wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The paying of creators definitely anti-competitive It's really not any different than what Netflix is doing now, right? Discounting SEO, the major issue was that they didn't build their own ad network. You set up business in Google's front yard and didn't like it when they told you to get out. The ad network (or rather the monetization model) is the hardest part of building a video sharing site. If that part wasn't…

Why don't you think that the hardest part is acquiring the viewers? At least nowadays, network traffic is cheap. You get 1TB for 1 euro [0]. You need 22 Mbps for 1080HD [1], which means you can stream 100 hours for 1 euro. If you stream 5min clips, that's 1200 clips for 1 euro. There should be enough ad networks that offer 2 euro CPM to make a profit. On the other hand, how can they make a profit if nobody is discove…

When you flip that on its head those rates actually seem pretty nightmarish when trying to compete with YouTube.

1200 views for 1 euro, that's 1000 eur for a million views. On top of that YouTube's rates of paying creators are in the same ballpark at 1k/million views.

So yeah your ad model needs be paying 2k+ per million views ( any one more familiar with the ad industry know the real value made curiously? ) on a video or your screwed

Re: How I tried to compete with YouTube and Google with Livevideo.com

#80

Post by nemothekid »

rubberstock wrote: post #64
nemothekid wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The paying of creators definitely anti-competitive It's really not any different than what Netflix is doing now, right? Discounting SEO, the major issue was that they didn't build their own ad network. You set up business in Google's front yard and didn't like it when they told you to get out. The ad network (or rather the monetization model) is the hardest part of building a video sharing site. If that part wasn't…

Why don't you think that the hardest part is acquiring the viewers? At least nowadays, network traffic is cheap. You get 1TB for 1 euro [0]. You need 22 Mbps for 1080HD [1], which means you can stream 100 hours for 1 euro. If you stream 5min clips, that's 1200 clips for 1 euro. There should be enough ad networks that offer 2 euro CPM to make a profit. On the other hand, how can they make a profit if nobody is discove…

>At least nowadays, network traffic is cheap.

But it's not. Your example is contrived, as Hetzner likely doesn't expect you to stream a 100 hours of 1080p HD content to 100 people simultaneously. Your users would have a laughably bad experience at scale. On a single box, it's unlikely you could max out your throughput - you could at most support 45 users on a single Hetzner node (1080p @ 22Mbps on a Gigabit connection in the best case).

If you are going to be serving content with any level of seriousness you need a CDN. 1TB of bandwidth on Cloudfront costs $87. Akamai charges $100-$150. Thats 100x than 1 euro/TB you initially priced out.

Post reply on HN