121–130 of 163 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just make sure you have you have a bot network storing the information in with multiple accounts. Also with with enough parity bits (E.g. PAR2) to recover broken vids or removed accounts.
Or.... backblaze B2
There's no Cloud-based backup service that's competive with tape.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Monuments erode away and memories of those enshrined are lost time as well, nothing lasts forever.
I met a user from an antique land Who said: Two squares of a clip of video Stand in at the end of the search. Near them, Lossly compressed, a profile with a pfp, whose smile, And vacant eyes, and shock of content baiting, Tell that its creator well those passions read Which yet survive, stamped on these unclicked things, The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed: And on the title these words appear: "My name i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One day, it will matter. Not even Google can escape the consequences of infinite growth. Kryder's Law is over. We cannot rely on storage getting cheaper faster than we can fill it, and orgs cannot rely on being able to extract more value from data than it costs to store it. Every other org knows this already. The only difference with Google is that they have used their ad cash generator to postpone their reality chec…
It depends. At the rough 2 PB of new data they get a day that’s about 10 sq ft of physical rack space per day. Each data center is like 500,000 sq feet so each data center can hold 120 years of YouTube uploads. They’re not going to have to restrict uploads anytime soon.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are right, but YouTube is also a massive repository of human cultural expression, whose true value is much more than the economic value it brings to Google.
Yes, but it's a classic story of what actually happened to the commons - they were fenced and sold to land "owners." Honestly, if you aren't taking full advantage within the constraints of the law of workarounds like this, you're basically losing money. Like not spending your entire per diem budget when on a business trip.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Growth in this context is that there are a larger volume of videos each year. So each year a single video is exponentially a smaller and smaller percentage of the total.
Yeah and the math doesn't check out. For example, if in year N youtube has f(N) new video. Let assume f(N) = cN^2. It's a crazy rate of growth. It's far better than the real world Youtube, which grew rather linearly. But the rate of "videos that are older than 5 years" is still faster than that, because it would be cubic instead of quadratic. Unless the it's really exponential (it isn't), "videos that are older than…
Such a weird strawman argument that you are making up. You've over thought this so much that you are missing the forest from the trees
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I met a user from an antique land Who said: Two squares of a clip of video Stand in at the end of the search. Near them, Lossly compressed, a profile with a pfp, whose smile, And vacant eyes, and shock of content baiting, Tell that its creator well those passions read Which yet survive, stamped on these unclicked things, The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed: And on the title these words appear: "My name i…
This is amazing.
I once asked one of the original YouTube infra engineers “will you ever need to delete the long tail of videos no one watches” They said it didn’t matter, because the sheer volume of new data flowing in growing so fast made the old data just a drop in the bucket
One day, it will matter. Not even Google can escape the consequences of infinite growth. Kryder's Law is over. We cannot rely on storage getting cheaper faster than we can fill it, and orgs cannot rely on being able to extract more value from data than it costs to store it. Every other org knows this already. The only difference with Google is that they have used their ad cash generator to postpone their reality chec…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course videos disappear for copyright, ToS violations, or when the uploaders remove them. They do not disappear just because nobody watched them.
There’s a whole activity around discovering random 15 year old videos with almost no views. It’s usually some random home video
Basically being given videos to watch all day, especially coming from the middle east (this was ISIS time so any video from the area had someone watching it as soon as uploaded).
Needless to say there's endless gold no view videos according to him.
It's also interesting that it was no open secret that already in 2018 they were all told that they were essentially training machines to do their job.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Growth in this context is that there are a larger volume of videos each year. So each year a single video is exponentially a smaller and smaller percentage of the total.
Yeah and the math doesn't check out. For example, if in year N youtube has f(N) new video. Let assume f(N) = cN^2. It's a crazy rate of growth. It's far better than the real world Youtube, which grew rather linearly. But the rate of "videos that are older than 5 years" is still faster than that, because it would be cubic instead of quadratic. Unless the it's really exponential (it isn't), "videos that are older than…