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

PeerTube v6

framablog.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 203 posts

Re: PeerTube v6

#61

Post by w8whut »

madeofpalk wrote: post #60
Almondsetat wrote: post #35

I still cannot grasp how supposedly tech literate HN users can't seem to understand the purpose of PeerTube. Do you have a company and do you want to self host your promotional videos? Make a PeerTube instance and embed them in your website. Do you have a conference and want to self host the recordings? Same Do you have an institution of any kind and want to self host the video material? Same. Nowhere it's touted as…

How likely is it that my company's promotional videos will be federated to the extent that it'll actually reduce my bandwidth cost by a non-trivial amount? Will hosting videos like this increase reliability or reduce it? I genuinely don't know - i've never used it - but it would be far from my first pick for this kind of stuff. > but which platforms employ the power of the torrent protocol to distribute bandwidth so…

beside that... using a hosted service doesn't quiet qualify as selfhosted either.

And thats also ignoring the elephant in the room called pricing. egress is pretty expensive on AWS, you'd at least want to use their video streaming service instead of s3 for a consumer website.

Re: PeerTube v6

#62

Post by KingOfCoders »

Almondsetat wrote: post #35

I still cannot grasp how supposedly tech literate HN users can't seem to understand the purpose of PeerTube. Do you have a company and do you want to self host your promotional videos? Make a PeerTube instance and embed them in your website. Do you have a conference and want to self host the recordings? Same Do you have an institution of any kind and want to self host the video material? Same. Nowhere it's touted as…

"Do you have a company and do you want to self host your promotional videos? Make a PeerTube instance and embed them in your website."

If I'm a small company, I'd use something like BunnyCDN to stream my videos, because no one else will watch them so the benefits of Peertube are not there.

If I'm a company and I'm large I should have no problems paying for something and again would use something like BunnyCDN.

Re: PeerTube v6

#63

Post by glenstein »

RHSeeger wrote: post #52
Almondsetat wrote: post #35

I still cannot grasp how supposedly tech literate HN users can't seem to understand the purpose of PeerTube. Do you have a company and do you want to self host your promotional videos? Make a PeerTube instance and embed them in your website. Do you have a conference and want to self host the recordings? Same Do you have an institution of any kind and want to self host the video material? Same. Nowhere it's touted as…

> Nowhere it's touted as a rival to youtube in the popularity sense, just like you wouldn't call WordPress a rival to Twitter. But I also wouldn't give it a name that, to the casual observer, makes it _sound_ like a rival to Twitter.

I think this speaks to the frustration that OP has which I also do, which is that the commentary has barely moved even a millimeter past first impressions.

It's not in the form of any kind of principled objection to the project of building out the fediverse, any technical issue with the choice of technologies, or any affirmative argument in favor of the status quo where all this activity being captured by increasingly enshittified platforms. The motivations and the objectives are play are wrestling with important questions, and the peanut gallery thinks that talking about the first impression of the name counts as participating in that conversation, which is depressing.

Re: PeerTube v6

#64

Post by jraph »

KingOfCoders wrote: post #62
Almondsetat wrote: post #35

I still cannot grasp how supposedly tech literate HN users can't seem to understand the purpose of PeerTube. Do you have a company and do you want to self host your promotional videos? Make a PeerTube instance and embed them in your website. Do you have a conference and want to self host the recordings? Same Do you have an institution of any kind and want to self host the video material? Same. Nowhere it's touted as…

"Do you have a company and do you want to self host your promotional videos? Make a PeerTube instance and embed them in your website." If I'm a small company, I'd use something like BunnyCDN to stream my videos, because no one else will watch them so the benefits of Peertube are not there. If I'm a company and I'm large I should have no problems paying for something and again would use something like BunnyCDN.

It isn't easy to handle playing videos just with a CDN. You have to handle:

- the different formats because browsers support different stuff

- different qualities because you have to respect bandwidth visitors' bandwidth

- dynamic / adaptative quality

- CSP stuff

- nice UI for the video

etc.

At this point, PeerTube handles all this for you and it's easy to setup.

Re: PeerTube v6

#65

Post by glenstein »

joelthelion wrote: post #21
glenstein wrote: post #2

Truly inspiring work from Framasoft! I just hope for more adoption. I don't know if anyone remembers the days of Firefox 2 and 3 and the days of "community marketing" but I think something like that could be a worthwhile project here. I would love, for instance, if significant creators could do a Framasoft February each year where they commit to hosting some portion of videos of their choice on Peertube.

Framasoft February sounds like a great idea! I would definitely ask my favorite content providers to participate.

Well my thinking is that you can hardly think of an easier, lower-stakes ask than asking creators to voluntarily agree that something from their back catalog gets hosted and a new place.

And it allows old content to do new work, breathing life into a new platform.

Re: PeerTube v6

#67

Post by glenstein »

booteille wrote: post #34
Aachen wrote: post #7

Peertube is something I've been meaning to use, so I'm interested but don't know much about it. The post says they dropped webtorrent in favor of HLS. Does this mean Peertube is no longer peer-to-peer? HLS is a codec or container format or something, whereas webtorrent sounds like a method to have peers stream video data to each other such that the server doesn't easily bog down under traffic spikes. That seemed like…

Hi! There is a page on official documentation (docs.joinpeertube.org) (which needs to be updated to reflect the removal of WebTorrent but is still relevant on hls parts). Here is the one concerning us: " - If using the HLS player (depending on the admin transcoding configuration): - The player loads the HLS playlist using hls.js from the origin server - PeerTube provides a custom loader to hls.js that downloads segme…

Am I right in my understanding that sharing the load only happens for people viewing the same video?

Could there be a benefit to P2P distribution of bandwidth that isn't just at the video level, but perhaps at the instance level, where they choose to federate with other instances that also agree to share the P2P load? Or rather, to share the P2P wealth?

Re: PeerTube v6

#68

Post by indigochill »

infecto wrote: post #50
Almondsetat wrote: post #35

I still cannot grasp how supposedly tech literate HN users can't seem to understand the purpose of PeerTube. Do you have a company and do you want to self host your promotional videos? Make a PeerTube instance and embed them in your website. Do you have a conference and want to self host the recordings? Same Do you have an institution of any kind and want to self host the video material? Same. Nowhere it's touted as…

I think because many of us are not big fans of fediverse. For all of those examples you provided I would rather just pay for an existing service rather than burn time running PeerTube. The fediverse projects are interesting and glad people enjoy them but they are still not made for the masses (which I suppose is to the liking of those that enjoy the fediverse.

> they are still not made for the masses (which I suppose is to the liking of those that enjoy the fediverse)

I think more to the point, the fediverse is largely anti-commercial. You -can- advertise, but risk getting defederated if you do it in a way people disapprove of. And you -can- run a walled garden, but then what are you doing running a node that supports federation (this is one thing I'm still confused about with Threads, so I'm curious how that shakes out)?

But the reason the web exploded (at least in my mental model) was because it evolved to support commerce, which then got businesses using it and users following to buy things online which was a lot more convenient than buying things in brick and mortar stores. So if the fediverse remains anti-commercial (which is the only version I'm interested in) then it will probably never get the kind of money that Web 1/2/3 has, since every evolution has been funded by commerce, so it will probably always stay niche.

There are also legitimate usability challenges, too, though. I expect those will be solved eventually, but not soon since there's no money in it and money has always been an accelerator of technical development to the point people assume tech is fast because they're so used to the massive amounts of money being poured into tech. Even when they are solved, though, I still expect the fediverse to remain niche due to the lack of commercial opportunity (and I say that as a big fan of the fediverse - as you suppose, I think it's actually to its benefit that it to some extent undoes the Eternal September).

Re: PeerTube v6

#69

Post by amomo »

hutzlibu wrote: post #12
j_maffe wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They talk about stress-testing of livestreaming towards the end of the article. A quick search shows that they've done several of them for videos as well. The peer-to-peer structure really protects them from sudden scale in demand.

"The peer-to-peer structure really protects them from sudden scale in demand." In theory, for sure. But in reality the p2p part might not work for lots of users for various reasons (firewall etc.) so then the server gets all the load and chokes. At least that has be my experience when experimenting with webRTC. "Last year, thanks to French indie journalist David Dufresne’s Au Poste ! livestream show and his hoster Oc…

Indeed it's not a big number, but you don't need to have a lot of viewers to be in the top 1% of twitch : https://twitter.com/zachbussey/status/1367868296473813001

So, what if peertube was a good answer to 99% cases ?

Re: PeerTube v6

#70

Post by hutzlibu »

jelv wrote: post #33
hutzlibu wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if you stream from the server, it still would still not be p2p. SO either they implemented their own custom p2p solution, where the peers stream HLS to other peers, or they abandoned p2p. edit: the main FAQ on the website still clearly says, it is p2p. But now I am curious if they really implemented their own p2p solution, or if this is outdated. https://joinpeertube.org/en_US#what-are-the-main-advantages-...

"WebTorrent is a wonderful library that allowed PeerTube to be created five years ago. But due to many limitations of the library we decided to implement and default to another P2P protocol used in coordination with HLS. This new HLS player works very well, and does not have all the limitations of the WebTorrent player. It also allowed us to implement live streaming in PeerTube." https://github.com/Chocobozzz/PeerTub…

Thanks, now I am really curious to try that out and see how it works under the hood. What I need, would also be the option to ask users first, if they want to upload as well. People on a mobile connection should be able to opt out. (Quick search did not reveal this).
Post reply on HN