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

191–200 of 803 posts

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

#191

Post by didntcheck »

Latty wrote: post #156
anonymousiam wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

It's always funny seeing Americans who have clearly got their news about the UK from questionable sources telling us how actually we live in a dystopian open-air prison. In the US, you have people being literally grabbed off the street and sent to foreign prisons because of their speech with no due process, but the UK is the one close to a loss of freedom of speech because checks notes you can be convicted in a court…

I also live in the UK, and I in fact care about both of these. "Things are worse in America" is a tired and harmful cliché frequently used to deflect valid complaints about affairs here. Is the Trump administration really the low bar we're happy with?

And I'm afraid we're long past the point of dismissing police and state overreach into freedom of expression as an "American/right-wing myth". The Julian Foulkes case [1] is just one recent example - and no, the fact that they apologised in this one case, featuring an important person, that received substantial media attention, is not enough to reassure me that it was an error

[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0j718we6njo

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

#192

Post by CJefferson »

jorams wrote: post #180
znpy wrote: post #100

@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 hav…

Nebula[1] is an alternative to YouTube for and by youtubers. I'm fairly certain it's much bigger than Floatplane. It has ad-free versions of the creators' youtube videos, early access for new videos, and exclusive content. It seems to be pretty successful. It is also, like Floatplane, totally irrelevant without the pull from YouTube, because that's where the audience finds these creators in the first place. [1]: http…

I would love to love nebula, I bought a one year subscription. I let it lapse because discovery was awful, I found several nebula authors from YouTube, but never via nebula.

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

#193

Post by fortran77 »

InternetUser wrote: post #172
fortran77 wrote: post #122

Every time I sit down at my own piano in my own living room and record something written by a composer who died 150 years ago or more, I get a copyright strike on YouTube--often by a big label (BMI, etc). Last week it was a Robert Schumann piece, composed in 1848. The strike is still there, even though I contested it. (The form to contest it doesn't even have a good box to check for this scenario.) I would love it if…

Rick Beato has talked about this problem; in one video, he was even talking about how 5-second snippets of jazz were causing videos to be taken down, but the algorithm didn't even identify the right song. It reminds of how, in using the Shazam app, I've had numerous instances where it will wrongly identify a track 2 or 3 times, and even stick with the wrong answer. But even bands like Guns N' Roses and The Eagles wil…

That's not _this_ problem. Guns n' Roses, the Eagles, etc (or someone assigned by them) owns the rights to the score, lyrics, and recordings of performances. These are separate copyrights. If you cover their song, you may still be infringing on their copyrighted lyrics, score, and arrangements.

I'm talking about compositions to which nobody has any rights to any part of (a recording of a performance can still have a copyright).

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

#194

Post by djtango »

dotancohen wrote: post #45
djtango wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

30 years of playing the piano and listening to all kinds of music and harmony never really clicked with me even after studying music theory. But watching YouTube videos made an instant impact. YouTube is a distracting mess full of doom scroll bait but if you have never found anything useful on YouTube, you haven't been looking very hard.

Would you mind sharing the videos that helped music click? Thank you!

Open Studio (OpenStudioJazz) and Nahre Sol I like. Charles Cornell gets an honourable mention.

Watching Nahre Sol break down Chopin's E flat Nocturne (Op9#2) gave me a penny drop moment. I have often had trouble memorizing the left hand for that piece even after writing out the harmonies but seeing her play out the progression as flat chords led me to realise I can change the pattern and then play the left hand as a very quick broken chord to hear the harmonic progression while also cementing in the muscle memory a lot more effectively.

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

#195

Post by nottorp »

hardwaresofton wrote: post #184
nottorp wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does Google's "AI" distinguish between small or large creators? Or some smaller platform that doesn't even have google's resources.

I think we may be discussing different things. When I talk about the DMCA machine, I mean the cottage industry of firms that make it their job to check the internet for infringement and file the appropriate claims. I'm not referring to Google's AI. My point was that those firms currently cater to large creators/the cost only makes sense for firms with lots of IP. BUT, if it was cheaper/more accessible (and profitable…

Yes but as i said two posts ago, those firms are not famous for their competence, they mostly carpet bomb everything.

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

#197

Post by SparksJoy981 »

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.

* it serves multiple sizes for faster/slower connections

* it serves it with correct codecs, whatever the original input

* from local servers that are close to the user, so it's faster

* it doesn't kill your bills when the video becomes moderately popular

* discussions built-in

* virality built-in

* it won't go down when you forget to pay your server

* you don't need to deal with hosting software updates

You can solve some of that with CDNs, some of them even do some kind of video players that do all the ffmpeg stuff for you, but then you have a third party in the mix again.

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

#198

Post by aleph_minus_one »

Lutger wrote: post #189
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,…

I don't see how one necessarily leads to the other. There's obviously already filtering going on in youtube, even before covid, on illegal content and also on legal content that is against the policy (adult content for example). How is Covid desinfo during the pandemic suddenly a slippery slope for anti-competitive measures, while all the other moderation measures aren't? Whats so special about anti covid desinfo rul…

> Whats so special about anti covid desinfo rules?

- The magnitude of content involved.

- The fact that there exists a significant part of the society which is vocal about not endorsing these particular deletions.

- The fact that many people became aware of the moderation ("censorship") that YouTube does and its power.

- The fact that these COVID information videos (despite being perhaps wrong) formed important patterns of opinions, i.e. some opinions considered "extremist" or "wrong" were suppressed.

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

#199

Post by imgabe »

lynx97 wrote: post #83
imgabe wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't watch youtube? Want educational content? Read a book or a technical blog post or documentation. Want entertainment? Read a book or watch a movie or TV show. I've never found anything that great about YouTube.

> a movie or TV show Any movie or TV show recommendations from the past 10 years that is actually enjoyable? I am pretty much done with movies. I don't even remember the last one I really enjoyed. Sunshine, Interstellar, Hateful Eight, Once Upon a time in Hollywood... Nothing notable in the past 5 years though. TV shows? Most require a subscription, which I am not willing to do for just a show or two.

I've enjoyed quite a few movies from the past 5 years, but I don't know what you like, so who knows.

Baby Assassins - japanese movie about two teenage girls who are assassins. Very weird and funny movie and the fight choreography I found fascinating. I can only describe as "floppy".

Tetris - this was on Apple TV. A fictionalized retelling of the story of getting Tetris out of the USSR and licensed to distribute in the US.

Weird: The Al Yankovic Story - A music biopic of Weird Al Yankovic, in true Weird Al style

Nobody - action / revenge flick with Bob Odenkirk

I could go on. No need to limit yourself to the past 5 years though. Surely you haven't seen every movie from before 2020?

Lots of great shows too, and you don't need any subscriptions on the high seas...

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

#200

Post by aleph_minus_one »

slg wrote: post #130
KurSix wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once you normalize vague enforcement around "problematic" content, the net just keeps widening

These slippery slope comments always seem a little naive to me because they imply there is some pure way to handle moderation. In practice, you have to be an extremist to think literally no content should be removed from Youtube with the most obvious example of something nearly everyone wants to be removed being CSAM. Maybe you would respond by saying that is illegal and only illegal content should be taken down. Acc…

> In practice, you have to be an extremist to think literally no content should be removed from Youtube with the most obvious example of something nearly everyone wants to be removed being CSAM.

What is extremist about this opinion? (EDIT: with the exception that we indeed remove CSAM and similar things "everybody" wants removed and will (importantly!) otherwise get YouTube into deep trouble, but (basically) nothing else)

Post reply on HN