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

PeerTube v2

framablog.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 159 posts

Re: PeerTube v2

#31

Post by [deleted] »

vanous wrote: post #16
kgraves wrote: post #5

Great work! This is a good YouTube alternative I can get behind, however after reading a little bit I kind of frowned at this line on the plugin paragraph. > You could also imagine plug-ins to sort videos in reverse alphabetical order, or to add a Tipee, Paypal or Patreon button below videos! Please don't consider or be tempted by those three proprietary platforms, I would much rather prefer donating using Liberapay…

Unfortunately, there is no alternative. Everybody uses PayPal or Stripe on the backend...

[deleted]

Re: PeerTube v2

#32

Post by Dangeranger »

m12k wrote: post #18
Dangeranger wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Napster was so successful that the RIAA filed law suits to shut it down.

Wasn't Napster based on a central server and then a bunch clients who found each other via that server and then connected p2p? (And since the central server was the weak link that law enforcement could go after, Bittorrent evolved to get rid of the need for it). If so it actually further underscores the point about a central server providing ease-of-use and not being able to expect 'normal' people to set up servers t…

Yes, and PeerTube also uses a central server as matchmaker model, but in this case the match could be made to another Federated server on a different host.

Re: PeerTube v2

#33

Post by MayeulC »

m12k wrote: post #22
swebs wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nextcloud. Or depending on how you define a server, Bittorrent.

I didn't know NextCloud was P2P (I thought it was just based on a central server with a bunch of clients) - what's the P2P part?

You can share content with users of other instances, or import content that is being shared with you into your own account. This is federation, but still quite limited.

Example: I can share a folder from I@myserver.org with you@yourserver.net

Re: PeerTube v2

#34

Post by kaffeemitsahne »

gillesjacobs wrote: post #8

In the space of distributed video platforms, I think Peertube has the right idea: Bitchute is gaining a lot of traction, but the core issue of centralized control remains. Distributed content delivery is not enough to prevent censorship and viewer manipulation. Federation will allow many platforms to proliferate and solves this problem. I hope Peertube gains traction, but they're fighting an uphill battle when it com…

>- Engagement: Unlike Youtube they cannot use a recommender system like for suggestions. Most Youtube views are from recommendations and related videos

I won't be missing yt's recommendations at all. If peertube can implement related videos only based on the current video and nothing else, that would be great though.

Re: PeerTube v2

#35

Post by stereolambda »

m12k wrote: post #6

Does anyone know of a successful server-based peer-to-peer project other than TOR and cryptocurrencies? I'm all for breaking free of the stranglehold of centralized proprietary platforms, but it also seems to me that most of the open source projects that ever really succeed at competing against entrenched proprietary incombents are the ones where a centralized service is being provided by a non-profit (e.g. Wikimedia…

> Maybe expecting people to set up a server is just a bridge too far? Maybe there's just too many conveniences in centralization for todays users to put up with the hassle?

The users expected to set up servers should be tech-savvy people (not necessarily with any programming experience) wanting to do something for their online and offline communities. This should be like hosting forums, which is still a thing here and there. Or WordPress.

This infrastructure should be in place when some major event strikes that would drive people from centralized platforms (compare https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21480623 ). Of course who knows what will happen. But at least, we should have a durable infrastructure as an alternative to big corporate players, even if only some people will use it in practice.

It would be interesting if Alphabet would support some PeerTube-like initiative at some point, as an anti-antitrust measure.

Re: PeerTube v2

#36

Post by janus24 »

tasogare wrote: post #25

The work done is awesome. I’ll try it because the idea of self-hosting low traffic videos is interesting. Besides, I can’t stand articles that use the so called écriture inclusive. Either they write in the accepted, standardized version of French or they fork it but don’t call it French.

Languages evolve all the time, without the creation of a "fork" language.

Re: PeerTube v2

#37

Post by JoshuaDavid »

gillesjacobs wrote: post #8

In the space of distributed video platforms, I think Peertube has the right idea: Bitchute is gaining a lot of traction, but the core issue of centralized control remains. Distributed content delivery is not enough to prevent censorship and viewer manipulation. Federation will allow many platforms to proliferate and solves this problem. I hope Peertube gains traction, but they're fighting an uphill battle when it com…

I wonder if a decentralized recommendation system is really impossible though. If it's possible to get a user to rate and classify a few videos along some dimensions, and made those classifications public, it might be possible to find other users who similarly classified those videos and recommend videos based on the ratings of those similar users. This would mitigate many attempts at censorship, though it probably worsens echo chamber issues.

Also, a new platform doesn't have to solve every problem with the old one to be an improvement. Decentralized content delivery with a centralized recommendation engine might still be enough to compete if centralized content delivery platforms screw up badly enough.

Re: PeerTube v2

#38

Post by mcjiggerlog »

I really want to like peertube but I think its UX, at least where it stands now, is going to hold it back from ever challenging youtube.

I use youtube a lot, and for a huge range of topics. I don't have any interest in creating an account on a niche-specific instance and I think the average user who doesn't even understand what federalization does even less. However, I literally don't even understand how to make an account on what, as far I can tell, is supposed to be the go-to instance - https://peertube.social. If there's no main platform where you can watch and discover general content then there's nothing that you can point new users to.

As a developer, if you want to host a niche video site, then peertube looks great. As a user, if you want to move off of youtube then I don't think this is how you're going to do that.

Re: PeerTube v2

#39

Post by MayeulC »

m12k wrote: post #6

Does anyone know of a successful server-based peer-to-peer project other than TOR and cryptocurrencies? I'm all for breaking free of the stranglehold of centralized proprietary platforms, but it also seems to me that most of the open source projects that ever really succeed at competing against entrenched proprietary incombents are the ones where a centralized service is being provided by a non-profit (e.g. Wikimedia…

As examples of successful server-based p2p projects go, I would have picked Matrix and Mastodon. Not as successful as e-mail, mind you, but steadily growing.

Matrix is envisioning a transition to a complete p2p system in the future, if that ever proves possible.

Some stats are available on https://the-federation.info/info , such services have been recently coined as the "fediverse", and ActivityPub is a standard that emerged out of the will to unify those services and make them interoperable: mastodon, peertube and diaspora are interoperable, AFAIK.

Re: PeerTube v2

#40

Post by kgraves »

timwaagh wrote: post #24

It seems like they did not consider how they want peertubers to be able to monetize. On the contrary, it seems they have something against 'capturing your attention and selling it to Fanta'. I want this piece of work to be exhibit A in how staying inside your ideological bubble will ensure failure. I think it's especially sad since they used crowdfunded money so they aren't just failing on their own dime.

> It seems like they did not consider how they want peertubers to be able to monetize.

This is a valid point, the majority of [YouTube] creators want to earn money from their content, which would make PeerTube more appealing to creators big & small IMO.

Post reply on HN