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

Our plans for PeerTube v4

joinpeertube.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 174 posts

Re: Our plans for PeerTube v4

#91

Post by remram »

aftbit wrote: post #86
google234123 wrote: post #82

The choice to maintain 80 projects and not grow beyond 10 employees is puzzling to me. Those two decisions seem antithetical to each other. 80 projects is too many regardless

Wow only one developer working on PeerTube and not even full time. No way will that level of effort be able to challenge any of the incumbents.

How many people work on YouTube, Vimeo, ... the platforms themselves, as opposed to promotion, monetization algorithms, marketing, etc? PeerTube actually works really well, and as long as communities come together to help with support/promotion/... I don't see why it couldn't "challenge any of the incumbents" even with only one developer on staff.

Re: Our plans for PeerTube v4

#93

Post by fallat »

aftbit wrote: post #86
google234123 wrote: post #82

The choice to maintain 80 projects and not grow beyond 10 employees is puzzling to me. Those two decisions seem antithetical to each other. 80 projects is too many regardless

Wow only one developer working on PeerTube and not even full time. No way will that level of effort be able to challenge any of the incumbents.

It isn't about challenging anything.

It's about a libre alternative.

Does the apple challenge the orange? They are both fruits!

Re: Our plans for PeerTube v4

#94

Post by hossbeast »

colordrops wrote: post #50
rosmax_1337 wrote: post #12

I am very hopeful for Peertube and their project, since I'm currently partaking in hosting a large video website for otherwise content too controversial for mainstream platforms like Youtube. (Political content if you were wondering, but I won't indulge what kind) This takes back control to creators in such a way that essentially only domain registrars will be able to dictate what content may stay alive on the intern…

And if they start taking down domains without due process, parallel DNS systems will arise.

Handshake, for example.

Re: Our plans for PeerTube v4

#95

Post by sschueller »

IshKebab wrote: post #74

Can someone explain the point of federating PeerTube. Their site doesn't really explain it, and it seems like you still need to create an account on every instance you want to use (if you want to comment on/rate videos). How is it different from lots of independent sites, with RSS feeds for each channel?

You only need one account on any instance and you can rate/comment on any video in the federated network. However there are instances that don't follow each other and for those you would need a separate account.

Re: Our plans for PeerTube v4

#96

Post by sschueller »

aftbit wrote: post #86
google234123 wrote: post #82

The choice to maintain 80 projects and not grow beyond 10 employees is puzzling to me. Those two decisions seem antithetical to each other. 80 projects is too many regardless

Wow only one developer working on PeerTube and not even full time. No way will that level of effort be able to challenge any of the incumbents.

You are welcome to help. I have very little time but managed to get a working android client running and published: https://github.com/sschueller/peertube-android

Re: Our plans for PeerTube v4

#98

Post by LinuxBender »

camjohnson26 wrote: post #58
rosmax_1337 wrote: post #12

I am very hopeful for Peertube and their project, since I'm currently partaking in hosting a large video website for otherwise content too controversial for mainstream platforms like Youtube. (Political content if you were wondering, but I won't indulge what kind) This takes back control to creators in such a way that essentially only domain registrars will be able to dictate what content may stay alive on the intern…

I got to see this first hand recently. Tesla has a rabid fan base that try to take down any negative information. Somebody posted a video on YouTube criticizing Tesla’s full self driving system and using short clips from other channels that are clearly fair use. Users spammed DMCA takedown requests and YouTube removed the video. Other users published it to Vimeo, Veoh, and a few other sites but those all got taken do…

Have they tried just putting the video on a VPS VM and a single static web page with a synopsis of the video? Unless there are tens of thousands of simultaneous viewers, one should not even need a CDN. Happy to test this to see if things have changed. If there are tens of thousands of simultaneous viewers, there are about 35 or so decent CDN vendors out there. Some of them are quite affordable.

Re: Our plans for PeerTube v4

#99

Post by claudiawerner »

dexterdog wrote: post #43
Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US Supreme Court has ruled in favour of restrictions on free speech before; the First Amendment is not absolute. It is not unthinkable that with changing society and changing judicial review, the USA too may one day find hate speech to be a crime.

Hate speech being a crime is not the problem. The power of the arbiter of what defines hate speech is.

It's also unclear to me why that, in turn, is a problem. There are several fuzzy areas in American free speech law as it stands, and arguably most people are already happy to allow (and encourage) regulation in other important areas of life, from medical/food regulation to warranty regulations, to electrical safety regulations, to frequency band regulations. The 'power of the arbiter' there is almost never brought up as a problem, despite the fact that this immense power can have very real consequences.

If a democratically-elected government can be trusted (by the populace who influence the laws) to regulate what you can sell and what you can transmit in the airwaves, to regulate the minimum amount you can pay people, to regulate the age at which someone can be employed, etc. - why shouldn't the same government, subject to the same safeguards against misregulation, also have the ability to regulate this portion of speech too?

This is more of a devil's advocate argument than anything, but I'm interested in your thoughts.

Re: Our plans for PeerTube v4

#100

Post by wazoox »

google234123 wrote: post #82

The choice to maintain 80 projects and not grow beyond 10 employees is puzzling to me. Those two decisions seem antithetical to each other. 80 projects is too many regardless

They explicitly want to say small, and they plan to phase out many projects, in the hope that others will carry on.
Post reply on HN