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

PeerTube v6

framablog.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 203 posts

Re: PeerTube v6

#71

Post by jasode »

jraph wrote: post #64
KingOfCoders wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Do you have a company and do you want to self host your promotional videos? Make a PeerTube instance and embed them in your website." If I'm a small company, I'd use something like BunnyCDN to stream my videos, because no one else will watch them so the benefits of Peertube are not there. If I'm a company and I'm large I should have no problems paying for something and again would use something like BunnyCDN.

It isn't easy to handle playing videos just with a CDN. You have to handle: - the different formats because browsers support different stuff - different qualities because you have to respect bandwidth visitors' bandwidth - dynamic / adaptative quality - CSP stuff - nice UI for the video etc. At this point, PeerTube handles all this for you and it's easy to setup.

>It isn't easy to handle playing videos just with a CDN. You have to handle: [... various video delivery tasks...]

I think gp's "BunnyCDN" was shorthand for the video-as-a-service Bunny Stream: https://bunny.net/stream/

That "turnkey" managed service from Bunny would be more feature-complete for businesses than self-hosting PeerTube.

Re: PeerTube v6

#72

Post by hutzlibu »

amomo wrote: post #69
hutzlibu wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The peer-to-peer structure really protects them from sudden scale in demand." In theory, for sure. But in reality the p2p part might not work for lots of users for various reasons (firewall etc.) so then the server gets all the load and chokes. At least that has be my experience when experimenting with webRTC. "Last year, thanks to French indie journalist David Dufresne’s Au Poste ! livestream show and his hoster Oc…

Indeed it's not a big number, but you don't need to have a lot of viewers to be in the top 1% of twitch : https://twitter.com/zachbussey/status/1367868296473813001 So, what if peertube was a good answer to 99% cases ?

Oh, then those people should certainly use peertube. But then personally I would like to have a safe fallback, but this creates overhead.

Re: PeerTube v6

#73

Post by glenstein »

amomo wrote: post #69
hutzlibu wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The peer-to-peer structure really protects them from sudden scale in demand." In theory, for sure. But in reality the p2p part might not work for lots of users for various reasons (firewall etc.) so then the server gets all the load and chokes. At least that has be my experience when experimenting with webRTC. "Last year, thanks to French indie journalist David Dufresne’s Au Poste ! livestream show and his hoster Oc…

Indeed it's not a big number, but you don't need to have a lot of viewers to be in the top 1% of twitch : https://twitter.com/zachbussey/status/1367868296473813001 So, what if peertube was a good answer to 99% cases ?

Moreover, could we zoom out and ask what's at stake with this kind of question? What does a road map from Peertube in its present day towards twitch or YouTube level adoption look like, how long would that take?

I ask because that's the kind of runway where there's time to continue to work out questions like this, and they aren't at present make or break, and so far as I can tell there's no reason to believe issues about firewalls pose an issue that's any more or less difficult than the technical challenges they've already solved.

Re: PeerTube v6

#74

Post by master-lincoln »

Qwertious wrote: post #19
MiguelX413 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who says Peertube needs to take off to be good? I like, prefer, and use the fediverse in its current state personally.

>Who says Peertube needs to take off to be good? The fact that it's a video-watching site and that means it needs people to upload videos onto it.

> >Who says Peertube needs to take off to be good?

> The fact that it's a video-watching site and that means it needs people to upload videos onto it.

It's not a video watching Website. It's a video serving platform in the fediverse. You can use it to host videos independently. It's not necessarily meant as a platform with a single entry point for users to find any kind of video like YouTube. It's more comparable to WordPress maybe

Re: PeerTube v6

#75

Post by paulnpace »

MiguelX413 wrote: post #16
Nextgrid wrote: post #5

Still has the same problem as all these alternative social media networks and why they're not taking off: on one hand you've got YouTube/etc which works and has appealing content front-and-centre, and on the other you have technobabble like "federation" and "instances" while the actual content (if there is even any!) is relegated into some dark corner. YouTube (and other mainstream providers) solves user stories. The…

Who says Peertube needs to take off to be good? I like, prefer, and use the fediverse in its current state personally.

> Who says Peertube needs to take off to be good?

All those who don't remember we are in Eternal September.

Re: PeerTube v6

#76

Post by Kinrany »

georgyo wrote: post #49
Klonoar wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but which platforms employ the power of the torrent protocol to distribute bandwidth so you can run with minimal costs? If TFA is to be believed, not PeerTube. ;P > We needed to settle a technical debt : v6 removes support for WebTorrent to focus on HLS. Both are technical bricks used to get peer-to-peer streaming in web browsers, but HLS is more fitted to what we are doing (and plan to do) with PeerTube

I did some testing of peertube a little over a year ago, and in practice you never used the webtorrent stuff anyway. The webtorrent always had a static http seed which is how videos played fast, but that web seed was usually more than capable of serving all the traffic. More so, it _must_ be capable of doing so because not all your clients will be able to support webtorrent effectively. In order to use a webtorrent,…

I would imagine the main use case to be as fallback in times of peak usage.

Re: PeerTube v6

#77

Post by corobo »

vintermann wrote: post #37
corobo wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Peertube has a bit of a benefit here in that if they can get the SEO right folks don't really need to use the federation guff to find videos, they should just be able to find them via a regular old search engine I'm not sure I agree on the content being hidden in a dark corner, there's a fair few examples of instances and content on the homepage. It'd be nice if the "Discover more" button showed more examples…

The regular old search engine controlled by a company that would lose billions if Peertube took off? No, it's true that YouTube's advantage is the same as Spotify's advantage: Discovery. It has an actually damn good recommendation engine. It fairly regularly shows me videos with less than 10000 views that are spot on. I'd love to use Peertube over Youtube, but I have to actually know of something cool on Peertube fir…

I said a regular old search engine, not the. There's more than one search engine.

As for the implication that Google may boost YouTube or deboost Peertube in search results, good news! There's already a lawsuit in progress there with Rumble, so hopefully we'll see if they are doing that at some point in the (relatively speaking for this kind of thing) near future :)

https://casetext.com/case/rumble-inc-v-google-llc-5

Latest update I could find on this:

https://twitter.com/chrispavlovski/status/172704434443016627...

Re: PeerTube v6

#78

Post by jessehattabaugh »

Avamander wrote: post #24

Removal of WebTorrent is sad, as it's still WIP in actual torrent clients (but those do move slow anyways, it's not WebTorrent's fault). So it was removed before it got a chance in an ecosystem that moves slow. It also takes PeerTube instances further away from being able to P2P without too many extra steps other than a shared infohash (and DHT). Video re-upload conflicts with such immutable solutions, but that's mor…

Perhaps a fork is in order!?

Re: PeerTube v6

#79

Post by hutzlibu »

glenstein wrote: post #73
amomo wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed it's not a big number, but you don't need to have a lot of viewers to be in the top 1% of twitch : https://twitter.com/zachbussey/status/1367868296473813001 So, what if peertube was a good answer to 99% cases ?

Moreover, could we zoom out and ask what's at stake with this kind of question? What does a road map from Peertube in its present day towards twitch or YouTube level adoption look like, how long would that take? I ask because that's the kind of runway where there's time to continue to work out questions like this, and they aren't at present make or break, and so far as I can tell there's no reason to believe issues a…

"there's no reason to believe issues about firewalls pose an issue that's any more or less difficult than the technical challenges they've already solved."

Certainly. I am 100% certain that the whole concept is doable.

Re: PeerTube v6

#80

Post by errhead »

glenstein wrote: post #67
booteille wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi! There is a page on official documentation (docs.joinpeertube.org) (which needs to be updated to reflect the removal of WebTorrent but is still relevant on hls parts). Here is the one concerning us: " - If using the HLS player (depending on the admin transcoding configuration): - The player loads the HLS playlist using hls.js from the origin server - PeerTube provides a custom loader to hls.js that downloads segme…

Am I right in my understanding that sharing the load only happens for people viewing the same video? Could there be a benefit to P2P distribution of bandwidth that isn't just at the video level, but perhaps at the instance level, where they choose to federate with other instances that also agree to share the P2P load? Or rather, to share the P2P wealth?

That's the p2n layer that already exists in PeerTube through the redundancy feature in federation.

Federated instances that enable redundancy copy all resolutions of a video that meet chosen criteria of popularity. When a user views the video on PeerTube, their browser grabs the sections of the video from any of the PeerTube instances that have a copy, creating an ad-hoc distributed CDN. This covers the mid-level of popularity and keeps the hosting instance from getting slammed on bandwidth.

If something goes viral, or during livestreams which are by nature simultaneous, then the p2p in the browser between viewers kicks in and reduces load on the peering servers even more.

Post reply on HN