121–130 of 174 posts
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?
What I don't understand is why they don't broaden the scope and work more like IPFS, with a thin shell for displaying video data.
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…
One of the first instances I stumbled upon was this guy. Your mileage may vary. https://videos.martinezperspective.org/videos/trending?a-sta...
You don't need to browse all the instances, you can stick to ones recommended by curators you trust.
Joinpeertube should do better about how it promotes instances for newbies.
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…
2010-2015 was the golden age of YouTube. Adpocalypse effectively killed it as a neutral platform and now even mildly controversial videos get demonetized and/or removed. I therefore consider Peertube as essiantial as Wikipedia and Openstreetmap. I hope it becomes mainstream alternative to YouTube.
So I am thinking of nodes that wouldn't actually host the websites but rather only would accept bittorrent URIs and then seeding them. To make sure that the ecosystem doesn't fail.
What would the economics behind this look like? So in short what server providers provide the best deal for just bandwidth. I suppose that this mostly would require bandwidth. The second priority would be storage space of course.
So what seems to be a potential problem with peertube is that if you put up a node and then if you get popular you might run into a bandwidth cap with your VPS. The average user probably wouldn't be interested or have the know how to do this, but I believe it would suffice that if there is a certain percentage of people who have interest in keeping peertube online it might be doable.
Question to PeerTube: What are you doing to curb the ever-growing number of white supremacists using your platform?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What I don't understand is why they don't broaden the scope and work more like IPFS, with a thin shell for displaying video data.
Isn't that more or less the idea behind LBRY?
I do believe I tried to sign up for LBRY but I don't know if it really took up.
Might it be that LBRY simply doesn't scale or that there is some network effect that causes it not to work unless there are some specific conditions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Surely that's most instances? I don't see why the Blender instance would follow the Extinction Rebellion instance for example? And doesn't that make it an N^2 problem? Does every instance have to follow every other instance to make this work?
This is like you want to follow some channel from tilvids.com but dont want to follow the entire instance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What I don't understand is why they don't broaden the scope and work more like IPFS, with a thin shell for displaying video data.
Isn't that more or less the idea behind LBRY?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hate speech being a crime is not the problem. The power of the arbiter of what defines hate speech is.
In China, "hate speech" includes anything that is critical of the government. I'm very happy that the U.S. has a very high bar for free speech, otherwise we would have been in a very bad spot all throughout the previous presidential administration.
Smh
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Punishment for crimes like hate speech should be enforced Can I assume you're not in America? In the USA, "hate speech" is not, and cannot be, a crime. The 1st Amendment forbids content-based limitations on speech.
A death threat against a whole ethnicity is illegal and in no way considered protected speech, and same goes for libel and threats to individuals. And this is by design.
No, in America this is false. A true threat must be a credible, present danger to its target. Saying "all people of race X should be killed" is nothing like that.
same goes for libel and threats to individuals.
No. Libel is not illegal, and is still protected against prior restraint. It's only addressable through civil liability suits.
And this is by design.