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

Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

jeffgeerling.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 803 posts

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#91

Post by MindSpunk »

AStonesThrow wrote: post #48
mitthrowaway2 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have like 50 DVDs in my collection. Do you have a problem if I make backups?

[flagged]

I think they're just a media collector. I do the same thing. I have 48TB of storage in a ZFS pool for my media rips. I couldn't share them even if I wanted to, my 4K bluray rips are like 80GB a pop. My internet isn't that good.

Heaven forbid someone want to put their media collection onto redundant storage instead of cheap plastic discs with a questionable shelf life.

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#93

Post by Lio »

anonymousiam wrote: post #75
w14 wrote: post #59

This is the problem I had with all the content removal around Covid. It never ends with that one topic we may not be unhappy to see removed. From another comment: "Looks like some L-whateverthefuck just got the task to go through YT's backlog and cut down on the mention/promotion of alternative video platforms/self-hosted video serving software." This is exactly what YT did with Covid related content. Here in the UK,…

[flagged]

Don’t be silly.

The UK may not be perfect but no one’s going to complain if you compare the Prime Minister or the King to a cartoon bear.

Or you talk openly about a government fuck up. Or about one part of the country maybe deciding to become independent.

You just can’t shout fire in a crowded cinema and you can’t say “let’s all meet at the local hotel at 3.30 and burn the immigrants to death” during a riot.

I’m ok with that.

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#94

Post by ta12653421 »

Helmut10001 wrote: post #89

A bit off topic, but still: Why do we need YouTube and other "Video Hosting" platforms at all? Simply upload your video (webm, or MP4) to any static Webserver and embed in HTML5. Plays nicely and no adds. I don't get why some sites still embed their movies stored on YouTube.

have you ever used the YT tools for managing videos and all the stuff?

its super convenient, even non-techies will get it done within 15min, also you have lot of supportive functions / tools in der admin interface.

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#96

Post by ajuc »

anonymousiam wrote: post #75
w14 wrote: post #59

This is the problem I had with all the content removal around Covid. It never ends with that one topic we may not be unhappy to see removed. From another comment: "Looks like some L-whateverthefuck just got the task to go through YT's backlog and cut down on the mention/promotion of alternative video platforms/self-hosted video serving software." This is exactly what YT did with Covid related content. Here in the UK,…

[flagged]

And still it's the "free-speech" USA that deports students for protesting against Israel war in Gaza and not UK.

There's the wording of the law, and then there's the practice of the government. Most communist regimes in Eastern Europe had pretty nice constitutions. It's just that everybody knew it doesn't matter what the constitution says - you complain = you're off to the national variety of a KGB prison.

When your government ignores courts and laws and just deport people as it sees fit for their protesting or their tatoos - you do not have free speech. No matter what your laws say.

BTW - USA arguably didn't have free speech for majority of its existence. If you were a slave you certainly didn't.

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#97

Post by pdpi »

lynx97 wrote: post #86
pdpi wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as we need an alternative to YouTube, Rumble’s whole gimmick is basically “we don’t block nazis”. Insofar as supporting problematic businesses goes, that’s out of the frying pan and into the fire.

Whats the issue? Are you afraid of being swayed? Feels a bit like homophobia at times. Those being most vocal are likely trying to hide something about their own personality...

The issue is that I don't want to be part of their revenue streams, or DAUs, or anything else that helps build their business.

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#98

Post by gtsop »

Helmut10001 wrote: post #89

A bit off topic, but still: Why do we need YouTube and other "Video Hosting" platforms at all? Simply upload your video (webm, or MP4) to any static Webserver and embed in HTML5. Plays nicely and no adds. I don't get why some sites still embed their movies stored on YouTube.

Your use case is simplistic so it dismisses actual use cases.

People make money on youtube through ads, you can't do that (as effectively) on your own server. This also ties with the analytics.

Some organisations like the ready-made administration solution. Uploading files through ftp isn't for everyone. Youtube (and hosting platforms) has a nice ui to manage all the content, handles the user authentication etc.

Bandwith.

Backups.

I aggree that for people who don't need all these, and are tech savvy, uploading an mp4 to a server is the way to go.

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#99

Post by consp »

throwaway290 wrote: post #53
BLKNSLVR wrote: post #13

I like the way Jeff signed off the article, pointing out that whilst the video has been pulled for (allegedly) promoting copyright infringement, Youtube, via Gemini, is (allegedly) slurping the content of Jeff's videos for the purposes of training their AI models. Seems ironic that their AI models are getting their detection of "Dangerous or Harmful Content" wrong. Maybe they just need to infringe more copyright in o…

> Youtube, via Gemini, is (allegedly) slurping the content of Jeff's videos for the purposes of training their AI models If by "allegedly" you mean that google admitted it > Google models may be trained on some YouTube content, but always in accordance with our agreement with YouTube creators ( https://techcrunch.com/2024/05/14/google-veo-a-serious-swing... ) Where "agreement" likely means "you accepted some tos 15 y…

> Where "agreement" likely means "you accepted some tos 15 years ago so shut up".

I am not a content creator or business on yt but i am 99.9% certain as soon as you enter your business credentials to make money they pretty much are allowed to do as they please and change the terms without notice (to which you must agree). And because as pointed out into the article, yt is a monopoly in all but name you have to agree to it as there are no viable alternatives.

Re: Self-hosting your own media considered harmful according to YouTube

#100

Post by znpy »

@geerlingguy:

First things first: I'm on your side. But the whole content-creator industry should really start looking for and pushing alternatives to Youtube.

Floatplane from LTT folks looks promising, I wish it got more attention. It seems that only Linus and Luke actually had the balls to come up with a business model and implement the darn thing.

Otherwise you (and other content creators) sooner or later will have to decide between self-censoring and make a living.

Post reply on HN