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

PeerTube is a free, decentralized and federated video platform

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 376 posts

Re: PeerTube is a free, decentralized and federated video platform

#61

Post by blooalien »

zuzululu wrote: post #16

is it bulletproof ? I don't think peertube has fixed that massive legal liability to the "seeders" same situation that bitorrent found itself in

If you only seed videos you have full legal rights to (creative commons [as long as you follow the license terms properly], public domain, or videos you personally created yourself, therefore own all rights to outright), then where's the worry? If you choose to seed copyrighted videos, well then that's all on you to handle the legality of (or lack thereof) I'd suppose... :shrug:

Re: PeerTube is a free, decentralized and federated video platform

#63

Post by dymk »

paxys wrote: post #34
hungryhobbit wrote: post #23

Stupid question: when people inevitably use this for pirate content, and the feds try to shut the service down ... what's the plan?

They can't shut down the service because there is no single service. They can go after individual servers, and that is fine. The admin is responsible for what happens on their server.

Why would an admin run a server if they might have the feds knocking at their door? Sure, people might run nodes that host only their content, but they sure are disincentivized from running any sort of shared service.

This is the same problem as TOR exit nodes and why 3 letter agencies run most of them.

Re: PeerTube is a free, decentralized and federated video platform

#64

Post by djaro »

paxys wrote: post #52
djaro wrote: post #41

As a professional YouTuber, the main issue I instantly see with this is the lack of monetization. I think people who don't make videos for a living severely underestimate how expensive it is to produce high-quality videos people want to watch. This isn't like writing a tweet or even posting a picture on Instagram. Even a decent 20-minute video can easily take 40 man-hours of high-skilled labor. I have a pretty small…

There are 100M+ channels uploading on YouTube regularly and only 2-3M of them are monetized. Not everyone wants to upload videos on the internet with the explicit goal of making money. Professional creators are a very tiny minority, and a platform like YouTube will always be better suited for them (your "small" channel with 100K subscribers is actually in the top 0.5-0.1% of YouTube). There is no reason for Peertube…

The problem is that big creators have many subscribers, because they're the only ones making videos people want to watch.

If a channel has 100 subscribers - (except if it's a brand new channel) - it's because people saw the videos and decided, no, I don't want to see this, I'm not going to subscribe.

Put all of those people on a platform together, you will just end up with a platform with more creators than viewers.

Re: PeerTube is a free, decentralized and federated video platform

#65

Post by squarefoot »

infamia wrote: post #48
djaro wrote: post #41

As a professional YouTuber, the main issue I instantly see with this is the lack of monetization. I think people who don't make videos for a living severely underestimate how expensive it is to produce high-quality videos people want to watch. This isn't like writing a tweet or even posting a picture on Instagram. Even a decent 20-minute video can easily take 40 man-hours of high-skilled labor. I have a pretty small…

You can publish to both and even better your own domain that simply points to your video hosting provider. Long term you want to own your distribution channel as much as possible, while using YouTube as your lead generation tool to drive true believers to your site and premium distribution channel not owned by YouTube. Otherwise, you will always be subject to platform risk via YouTube's whims which has destroyed many…

> You can publish to both and even better your own domain that simply points to your video hosting provider.

That one is likely the best use case while one monetizes on YT waiting for FreeTube to gain more popularity. Worth also for keeping a safer online accessible backup in case things go south with the YT channel being taken down for any reason, be it bogus copyright claims or else. What I'm not sure of though is how long until Google changes YT rules to disallow linking or even mentioning competing, or perceived as such, services. Companies always do that: I'm a Ebay user since 2008, 100% feedback both as seller and customer, hundreds of positives not a single negative or neutral in 18 years, but a while ago Ebay in their infinite wisdom blocked a listing of mine because I added the links of the documentation needed to use the device I was selling; no way to appeal successfully or have it restored, they evidently either used a monkey or AI to detect what they identified as an attempt to contact the customer outside of Ebay, for a €30 item nonetheless. Years ago they didn't enforce such idiotic limitations, so I wouldn't put any trust on YT to remain consistent with their current rules.

Re: PeerTube is a free, decentralized and federated video platform

#66

Post by mywittyname »

WarmWash wrote: post #39
GodelNumbering wrote: post #30

Youtube has been incredibly frustrating for many many reasons and is evidently evil in many axes now. We really need competition in video hosting.

Then start loading ads. Youtube's biggest threat ever died in the cradle because they foolishly thought users would volunteer money to them. No one with capital and capability looks at youtube, looks at youtube's audience, and says "Yeah, 30-40% ad-blocking and 4.5% paying for premium, these are the people I want to build services for!".

Those ad-blocked viewers are important, which is why YT doesn't actually crack down on them.

Those are the people who will happily go to an alternative product. And while that product might start as a pirate YouTube, the one that nabs 30% of YT's traffic can certainly make a pivot to legit. If you're a content creator whose audience is mostly in that group, you're likely to start posting content directly on the competitor's site.

I'm guessing OP had their account banned for using a tool like yt-dl too aggressively. Then again, doing that does give a warning.

Re: PeerTube is a free, decentralized and federated video platform

#67

Post by mywittyname »

dymk wrote: post #63
paxys wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can't shut down the service because there is no single service. They can go after individual servers, and that is fine. The admin is responsible for what happens on their server.

Why would an admin run a server if they might have the feds knocking at their door? Sure, people might run nodes that host only their content, but they sure are disincentivized from running any sort of shared service. This is the same problem as TOR exit nodes and why 3 letter agencies run most of them.

Maybe the live where the feds can't get them?

Re: PeerTube is a free, decentralized and federated video platform

#68

Post by mvdtnz »

djaro wrote: post #41

As a professional YouTuber, the main issue I instantly see with this is the lack of monetization. I think people who don't make videos for a living severely underestimate how expensive it is to produce high-quality videos people want to watch. This isn't like writing a tweet or even posting a picture on Instagram. Even a decent 20-minute video can easily take 40 man-hours of high-skilled labor. I have a pretty small…

Virtually all of the content I watch on youtube does not fall into this category. The content I watch is a mixture of raw footage, a guy speaking to a camera with minimal editing for 10 minutes (think Rick Beato, for those who know him), edited down footage of people working (pool cleaning guys, chefs, etc) or people playing music.

Frankly I wouldn't care at all if all of your over-produced thumbnail-bait disappeared overnight.

Re: PeerTube is a free, decentralized and federated video platform

#69

Post by ndriscoll »

djaro wrote: post #64
paxys wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are 100M+ channels uploading on YouTube regularly and only 2-3M of them are monetized. Not everyone wants to upload videos on the internet with the explicit goal of making money. Professional creators are a very tiny minority, and a platform like YouTube will always be better suited for them (your "small" channel with 100K subscribers is actually in the top 0.5-0.1% of YouTube). There is no reason for Peertube…

The problem is that big creators have many subscribers, because they're the only ones making videos people want to watch. If a channel has 100 subscribers - (except if it's a brand new channel) - it's because people saw the videos and decided, no, I don't want to see this, I'm not going to subscribe. Put all of those people on a platform together, you will just end up with a platform with more creators than viewers.

So? Why is that a problem? My wife occasionally watches this old lady who's vlogged every day for over 14 years straight. She averages 150-200 views. The people who try to build a brand end up getting outsized attention so it seems like that must be what anyone would want, but most people actually aren't trying to do that.

Re: PeerTube is a free, decentralized and federated video platform

#70

Post by djaro »

ktallett wrote: post #45
djaro wrote: post #41

As a professional YouTuber, the main issue I instantly see with this is the lack of monetization. I think people who don't make videos for a living severely underestimate how expensive it is to produce high-quality videos people want to watch. This isn't like writing a tweet or even posting a picture on Instagram. Even a decent 20-minute video can easily take 40 man-hours of high-skilled labor. I have a pretty small…

Your issue is assuming that this is trying to replace YouTube for those who wish to try and make money from this. I suspect this is much more closer to a Google videos or YouTube back in the day which was pretty much just random videos, plus lots of conferences on there (which don't get enough views to monetize). This can easily replace that and is something I would support. YouTube hasn't always been monetising and…

It's not about people "trying to make money", it's about viewers wanting to see high quality videos.

High quality videos just cost a lot of money and labor to produce. There is simply no way around this. Any platform which doesn't let creators monetize effectively will be stuck with what people produce in their free time. Which will essentially always be worse, because the competitors will have creators with actual budgets and time to work.

Post reply on HN