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

PeerTube, the “Decentralized YouTube”, succeeds in crowdfunding

quariety.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 305 posts

Re: PeerTube, the “Decentralized YouTube”, succeeds in crowdfunding

#261

Post by hobofan »

KaoruAoiShiho wrote: post #242
noitsnot wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$60k is mind-blowingly low. I wouldn't expect much, if anything from this site.

It got to the top of HN. That speaks to a tremendous demand. Most startups fail not because of money raised but because they don't have product market fit. People want this product to exist, but... the question is, will they actually use it. lol.

> It got to the top of HN. That speaks to a tremendous demand.

No it doesn't. It might just mean that enough people found it "neat" or interesting, but nobody should mistake a HN frontpage spot for "tremendous demand". It might also just mean that they used the right hype buzzwords at the right time.

Re: PeerTube, the “Decentralized YouTube”, succeeds in crowdfunding

#263

Post by franciscop »

noitsnot wrote: post #235
ryrobes wrote: post #224

People want viable services not "tech". Red flag: both their concept as well as name have YT's brand name in it. The equivalent of calling your company "Uber for X". I'm all for decentralization where it makes sense - but this seems like they might be shooting themselves in the foot everywhere EXCEPT the tech (which, ultimately won't matter if they fail). From the article: "Online since March 2018 in a beta version,…

$60k is mind-blowingly low. I wouldn't expect much, if anything from this site.

That would be a very good 1 year salary for Spain. In most parts of Spain (except the big cities) you can easily live 2 years with that. I expect France to be similar price-wise.

Re: PeerTube, the “Decentralized YouTube”, succeeds in crowdfunding

#264

Post by deltron3030 »

halflings wrote: post #94
deltron3030 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What the people who want decentralized services don't realize is that the content creators want centralized services (whether they realize it or not). Ideally you wouldn't decentralize the UI/UX, but the cloud server architecture it runs on. You could still maintain the same centrally accessible experience. That's the thing people need to understand, the frontend (UI) can be seperated and decoupled from the backend…

It's not just about UI/UX. You need a centralized backend to return recommendations in a reasonable time (if you need to query all the decentralized instances each time, it'll be incredibly slow)... which means that you go back to the scenario where a centralized instance is the source of traffic, decides what is recommended and what isn't. I guess there's still one advantage in that scenario: somebody can build a co…

Couldn't you store information about all nodes/content in every node? What would change is that the new uploaded stuff just isn't instantly available, only after syncing the new index with all other nodes. Not really a big problem, because most youtubers, especially the professional ones, shedule their uploads anyway.

Accessing your own node, the one your neighborhood or the next available one shouldn't be slower, the contrary I suppose.

Key seems to be to store the information or index on all nodes and syncing them.

Re: PeerTube, the “Decentralized YouTube”, succeeds in crowdfunding

#265

Post by StreamBright »

danShumway wrote: post #255
themagician wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not wrong. We have moved towards a world of centralized services because that's what people want. To many people it's the centralized services that "are" the Internet: YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram—that's it. YouTube is the lowest common denominator of video. You aren't going to "fix" its problems with a more complex decentralized network. If you want to solve the problems with YouTube you have to do it w…

> We have moved towards a world of centralized services because that's what people want. No, nobody cares about centralization. Centralization is a mechanism that provides some of the values people do care about; convenience, indexing, free hosting, simple interfaces. But it's a mistake to conflate centralization with the root cause that makes many of these services fail. If centralization was actually what people ca…

>>> No, nobody cares about centralization.

Great so it is not an important aspect of the problem. You just proved to yourself why PeerTube does not matter.

Re: PeerTube, the “Decentralized YouTube”, succeeds in crowdfunding

#266

Post by InternetUser »

lucideer wrote: post #236
themagician wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not wrong. We have moved towards a world of centralized services because that's what people want. To many people it's the centralized services that "are" the Internet: YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram—that's it. YouTube is the lowest common denominator of video. You aren't going to "fix" its problems with a more complex decentralized network. If you want to solve the problems with YouTube you have to do it w…

> We have moved towards a world of centralized services because that's what people want. We have moved towards a world of centralised services because decentralised ones are—by definition—difficult to monetise for the platform/software-maintainer(s). What people want is irrelevant when all potential options have to be initially well-funded: the choice is too restrictively limited to perform an honest comparison. > To…

> [YouTube is] incentivised to make what they're looking for as difficult to find as possible so that they'll spend hours and hours binging vacuous addictive content looking for something but never quite finding it and getting no satisfaction from the experience.

What you just gave is an imaginary description from someone who evidently doesn't use YouTube. I remember seeing Google presentations (on its official YouTube channel) in 2007 and 2008 where executives were saying that the goal of Google Search is to get you to what you're looking for as quickly as possible, and that's one reason that Google Search became the leader in search, and its very name is a verb for looking up something online. YouTube does the same exact thing, and the way they hook you into watching more are the automatic "related video" and "subscribe" overlays in the video player itself, and then the long column of related videos and, for any professional video, a pre-made playlist that is based on the viewing selections of other viewers, in the left column (on desktop browsers) or under the video (on phones). If I'm looking up a video by a singer, I find a long list of results. If I'm looking up funny bulldog videos, I find the same. If I'm looking up burger-cooking tutorials, I find the same. If I'm looking up clips from a certain TV show, I find the same. You're saying that YouTube doesn't do that? Try looking up some things on it and see for yourself: https://www.youtube.com/

Re: PeerTube, the “Decentralized YouTube”, succeeds in crowdfunding

#267

Post by InternetUser »

antt wrote: post #211
feral wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know whether you are right, but I don't find your argument persuasive. You could have made a parallel argument, before Youtube, about how people wanted only professional content, why a service for user created content would never work etc, because that's all that had worked, up to that point. Just because all the decentralized projects have failed so far doesn't mean they are doomed. Its really early days yet…

>You could have made a parallel argument, before Youtube, about how people wanted only professional content, why a service for user created content would never work etc, because that's all that had worked, up to that point. I remember in the early days people in the entertainment industry dismissing youtube as a useless piracy website which could never deliver any worth while content by itself. This was in 2006 when…

YouTube, launched in early 2005, actually instated the 10-minute limit in 2007 or 2008; I remember watching plenty of full TV shows in the first couple of years, and I remember that one of the most popular and constantly recommended were episodes of "Chappelle's Show" (noted in the Viacom lawsuit that could have destroyed YouTube, had Google not owned it by them) and there were also uploads of the Comedy Central version of "Who's Line Is It Anyway?" and 1980s and '90s SNL episodes. Then there was the 10-minute limit, then 15 [0]--and there were tons of broadcast-TV uploads that were divided up in such segments (such as the very popular "MoxNewsDotCom" channel's uploads of the 2008 U.S. election debates)--and then by the end of 2010, YouTube started allowing videos of any length, and I recall seeing novelty videos of some repeating loops for several or dozens of hours [1][2].

[0] Undated, but still showing up: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/71673?hl=en&co=GEN...

[1] "THE LONGEST VIDEO ON YOUTUBE - 596.5 HOURS" - Dec 14, 2011 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04cF1m6Jxu8

https://www.youtube.com/results?sp=EgIYAkIECAESAA%253D%253D&...

Re: PeerTube, the “Decentralized YouTube”, succeeds in crowdfunding

#268

Post by Jyaif »

resters wrote: post #144
themagician wrote: post #2

What the people who want decentralized services don't realize is that the content creators want centralized services (whether they realize it or not). In the old days we needed YouTube because you needed a Flash encoder if you wanted to make video accessible on the web to everyone. Now anyone can host video on anything. You can throw even throw some comments on the bottom if you want. But what those who create want i…

Your assumptions are completely wrong. Content creators simply want a platform for gathering an audience. Youtube wants to play as many ads as possible. Let's not pretend that somehow those interests align perfectly in the product we know as youtube. The audience generation mechanics are an important ingredient for replacing youtube, but youtube has gone from being a free service that had little user generated conten…

Your axioms are completely wrong.

Content creators wants as much money as possible, and Youtube wants as much money as possible.

Re: PeerTube, the “Decentralized YouTube”, succeeds in crowdfunding

#269

Post by r00fus »

parent5446 wrote: post #243
KaoruAoiShiho wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It got to the top of HN. That speaks to a tremendous demand. Most startups fail not because of money raised but because they don't have product market fit. People want this product to exist, but... the question is, will they actually use it. lol.

The audience of HackerNews is vastly smaller than the audience of YouTube.

PeerTube is not trying to replace YouTube. So the target markets don't have to overlap or even look similar.

If PeerTube is successful YouTube will most likely still exist and be dominant.

Re: PeerTube, the “Decentralized YouTube”, succeeds in crowdfunding

#270

Post by MarkMc »

amitkgupta84 wrote: post #189

As a content creator, once you've recorded and edited your content, you have to solve for a few kinds of things: 1) hosting, content delivery, authentication and access control, styling and UI, etc. 2) discoverability, which requires things like a search engine, recommendation engine, a community/social network, links, etc. 3) some degree of independence, and the freedom to decide what content to show, what content t…

Many content creators also want (4) a way to maximize revenue for each ad displayed. That's certainly where YouTube shines
Post reply on HN