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

Popular YouTubers who are building their own sites

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 428 posts

Re: Popular YouTubers who are building their own sites

#141

Post by loudmax »

PartiallyTyped wrote: post #59
jasode wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Because they are finally learning that existing on someone else's platform sucks. Much better to get your own domain [...] A lot of people already know they're the less powerful economic actor on Youtube platform. Regardless, people upload videos to Youtube instead of their own domain because of tradeoffs . For unknown creators with no audience, Youtube doesn't suck (in comparison to hosting videos on personal domai…

Besides FloatPlane, other streaming websites that educational channels upload content to are nebula [1] and I think curiosity stream [2]. [1] https://watchnebula.com/ [2] https://curiositystream.com/

I got a subscription to Curiosity Stream with Nebula bundled in. While Curiosity Stream has original content, as far as I can tell all of the Nebula stuff is also available on YouTube. So as a Nebula customer the only real benefit is watching content without ads. This is well and good, but ads aside, Youtube is simply a more convenient platform. There's less outright garbage on Nebula, and that's a good thing because the search function and categories are hit and miss. Compared to Youtube, the keyboard controls are janky and there are no comments (arguably more of a feature than a shortcoming), so no real way to engage with the content creators.

Having said that I think I paid under $20 for a year's subscription for the bundle. At this rate it's cheap enough to be worthwhile even if you only watch a few hours of content per month. And I do hope these folks can make Nebula's business model work, there's some worthwhile stuff in there.

Re: Popular YouTubers who are building their own sites

#142

Post by jjbinx007 »

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #39

We are still a very long way from distributed discovery. Back in the day at Demon Internet (well known 90s UK ISP) every customer got a free 10MB of webspace - barely any of them used it. But it should have been how we all hosted our blogs and our videos. And it would solve a multitude of social media issues. If Facebook and youtube did not host its hard to see how they could compile trustable usage stats (#) and so…

I was just thinking the other day that a lot of us in the 90s chose our ISPs based on how much web space was provided by the ISP, how many news groups the ISP gave access to, number of included email addresses, etc.

Even the first broadband providers I used offered web space. I can't remember when it stopped being a thing.

Re: Popular YouTubers who are building their own sites

#143

Post by simias »

graeme wrote: post #70

I follow CGP Grey’s stuff and it’s been interesting and instructive to see how he diversified. * His Youtube channel is his main platform * However, the money mostly comes from patreon subscribers, and you can also have videos delivered there * He also earns income from a podcast, Cortex * The Podcast has its own brand of sellable things, currently journals and Tshirts * He had a second podcast, hello internet, curre…

> However, the money mostly comes from patreon subscribers, and you can also have videos delivered there

Did he break that down publicly or do you get your info from elsewhere? I've always been curious to know what a typical high profile youtuber income flow looks like, and how much they're really tied to Youtube.

Re: Popular YouTubers who are building their own sites

#144

Post by celticninja »

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #99
celticninja wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally extreme ones. You can be politically on the right and espouse views such as "lower taxes, smaller government, less regulation" but spilling over into racism is what would be termed "wrong". The right are not at risk of being deplatformed,the racist right is.

That is a very narrow view. Take, for example, transgenders in women's sport. Do they have an unfair biological advantage over natural women? Are you a transphobe if you think so? Should you be cancelled and deplatformed if you think so? With so many potentially offensible groups, and with offense definition shifting so often, are you sure that something totally ok now won't deplatform you in 5 years?

I understand your point. I am not for or against here, I am providing context.

Yes it is a slippery slope argument, however it is almost unique to the United States due to free speech being enshrined in the constitution. Elsewhere free speech come with the caveat "don't be a dick", so you can say what you want e.g trans women should not compete in women's sport, but abusing trans women athletes is not acceptable.and yes societies views could change and even your inoccous statement could become a problem, but if social views have changed shouldn't you reasses your own views?

Also good internet hygiene would resolve this issue. delete your tweets every so often, comments etc. Nothing good ever came from resurrecting a 5year old tweet.

Re: Popular YouTubers who are building their own sites

#145

Post by ttt0 »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #137
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are hosts out there which will host you as long as you're not breaking any laws. Yea? Or must mean those “alt right hosts”. Because the second someone ACTUALLY practices this, they’re themselves labeled as AltRight. See the problem? > Registrars won't take away your domain just because they don't like your site. Has a domain ever been seized without a court order? Ar15.com went down without warning, provocati…

> Yea? Or must mean those “alt right hosts”. No, I mean hosts like Nearly Free Speech which has been operating since 2002. I've seen this one posted many times on HN and it seems great. https://www.nearlyfreespeech.net/ I understand what you mean though. Since they are usually smaller hosts, they aren't used by big name companies and eventually acquire a reputation for hosting only offensive content. > one day around…

>> one day around the election GoDaddy made a decision to cancel them

> Huh. How could they just do that? It eventually went back up right?

> Do you have more examples?

The first big deplatforming case was probably Cloudflare pulling The Daily Stormer. This is what Cloudflare CEO said:

> "Literally, I woke up in a bad mood and decided someone shouldn't be allowed on the Internet. No one should have that power."

Seems like even he agrees that they shouldn't be allowed to do that.

Re: Popular YouTubers who are building their own sites

#146

Post by imwillofficial »

marshmallow_12 wrote: post #118
imwillofficial wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Define “very good” You mean we get more websites? Oh my god! What if the internet has too many websites! Whatever will we do?! If only we had a way to crawl websites and make them into some kind of list for searching, like some kind of engine for search.

you misunderstood me. a quick google search reveals that YouTube uses 15% of internet traffic. You suggest getting rid of YouTube and putting 15% extra workload onto google. you think that won't be an issue? as for the "very good" part, yes, youtube is extremely successful at aggregating and displaying useful videos. It is also extremely good at searching through its library and displaying individual users useful vid…

Thanks for the clarification!

I disagree on youtube being very good at its job, however that is a very subjective assessment.

I think as it stands now, you are correct, but I believe these sites will give rise to more decentralized video sharing infrastructure as people slowly see the need to control their own destinies.

Re: Popular YouTubers who are building their own sites

#147

Post by dfcowell »

um_ya wrote: post #132
dalbasal wrote: post #117

This article is a little on the surface level, but it's true. People were screaming about where platforms and digital sharecropping was headed all along... and we're here now. Youtube, which is basically digital free-to-air is even more centralised than old free to air. Youtube really is an extreme situation. They really dominate a whole medium single handedly and youtubers have shockingly little power in the whole t…

There needs to be "content as a protocol" in the same way email is. If I don't like one email provider, I can always move to a different provider without losing access to all the user's that remain there. If I could make a Facebook post and have it's content propagate to other providers, websites would act more like UI filters rather than gatekeepers.

This sounds like ActivityPub?

Re: Popular YouTubers who are building their own sites

#148

Post by celticninja »

tux1968 wrote: post #133
cmeacham98 wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never seen somebody cancelled for an opinion similar to "Transgender women have an inherent advantage in women's sports due to the biological advantage of their body producing testosterone." I have seen people disagree with this opinion, but never call it immoral or transphobic. What I _have_ seen people get (correctly) called a transphobe for is the opinion "Transgender women should not be in women's sports b…

> I have never seen somebody cancelled for an opinion similar to "Transgender women have an inherent advantage in women's sports due to the biological advantage of their body producing testosterone." So should a human born as a woman who happens to naturally have higher testosterone than is typical in other women, be excluded from women's sport? Of course not. > "Transgender women should not be in women's sports beca…

I guess with that specific statement it would depend on context. In a civil discussion it would be fine, however if you posted it on a trans athletes forum it would be offensive. You have sought out someone who would likely be offended in order to make that statement. As part of a debate etc it is a perfectly fine statement to debate/discuss.

Re: Popular YouTubers who are building their own sites

#149

Post by imwillofficial »

erk__ wrote: post #58
imwillofficial wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does Vimeo offer that YouTube doesn’t do better? What reduction in risk does Vimeo offer that is any different than YouTube?

DRM Free movie downloads, also it supports better quality video. Though those are things that work because they do not have the same kind of customers/creators as YouTube in general.

You're right, but that misses the point of the exodus from Youtube, people aren't leaving over DRM or video quality. They are leaving because the precarious relationship with a capricious overlord. Their livelyhoods are in somebody elses hands.
Post reply on HN