• Metaright@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    163
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    YouTube might be the biggest challenge yet given the extraordinary amount of storage needed to recreate it.

    • simple@lemmy.mywire.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      67
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Its also getting the content creators onto the new platform. Thats a bigger challenge I think, without creators it’s a dead site really, and making videos is significantly more difficult than image or text posting.

      For storage, if we assume the format would be WebM at 1080p, 60fps and 20 minutes in length, it turns out to about 1GB. Even a cheap VPS instance usually offer 50GB of storage (with not too expensive storage upgrades).

      So if its distributed evenly, we can host a good bit of videos (nothing compared to YouTube though).

      • randomguy2323@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        56
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Its nearly impossible to replicate what YouTube it is today. The amount of storage and bandwith require is immense, also the creators coming up to a new platform without a way to get money it will really hard to have something like YouTube.

        • MostlyBirds@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Its nearly impossible to replicate what YouTube it is today.

          Why would we want to? People want to replace Youtube because Youtube sucks ass. Replacing it with another monetized platform will only ever lead to the same place Youtube is at now.

          It sucks that people who managed to make a living from their hobby have gotten fucked over, but until we have some major regulatory and economic overhauls, that’s just how it works. Changing platforms is not a solution to that.

          • Rakn@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Because what’s the point otherwise. Let’s just make a YouTube without videos. That will surely work.

      • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        So if its distributed evenly, we can host a good bit of videos (nothing compared to YouTube though).

        I read 500 hours of content are uploaded to YouTube every minute. Obviously a lot of that is low quality, but we’re still talking a lot of content unless we’re suggesting the creators host it themselves (which could work for a small subset of folks if it were enough of a turnkey solution).

      • hungry_freaks_daddy@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        60fps

        Correct me if I’m wrong but I would guess that the majority of YouTube videos are at 30fps, right? I only want 60fps for gaming/sports clips

      • Ilovethebomb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Convincing content creators to upload their videos to multiple platforms will be easy, as will uploading their old work

        You just end up with a chicken and egg situation with viewers and creators.

      • Norgur@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Let’s not forget that there’s money to be earned by being a youtube person. Creating a model that would make this possible in a federated approach would be bonkers as hell and probably just invite predatory dipshits who then lure creators with seemingly good offers and then start to hold them hostage in ways YouTube hasn’t dared so far.

        • Kichae@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Most professional YouTubers survive primarily off of Patreon support and sponsored videos. YouTube ads provide only a small fraction of what they earn. If they could increase their Patreon or sponsorship income by cross-posting to PeerTube, then they could be enticed to do so. The current issue there is that sponsors are going to want accurate analytics, and PeerTube isn’t going to be able to offer the kind of depth of audience analysis that YouTube can.

          The problem is, the cost of hosting videos – both in terms of storage and in terms of bandwidth – is kind of prohibitive. That part needs to be solved.

          • Neve8028@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The reality is that most content creators will not switch platforms because it guarantees a significant loss of viewership. Ad reads won’t pay much if you’re only talking to a fraction of your audience.

        • Gatsby@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          lure creators with seemingly good offers and then start to hold them hostage in ways YouTube hasn’t dared so far.

          Like Smosh?

          Young up and coomers, first giants on YouTube. Sold their channel and brand for stock. Then were tied to the company for years who worked them like dogs. Until the company that bought them went bankrupt so their stock was nullified and they in the end sold their company for $0.

          I wouldn’t say YouTube was free from it

      • Refurbished Refurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Torrents are peer to peer. The storage comes exclusively from seeders. If nobody is seeding a torrent, and nobody has the data, it is dead and the data no longer exists.

    • Metallibus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, this is the one I don’t see happening.

      Look at Twitch. Microsoft, Facebook, and (somewhat) Google have attempted to dethrone them and they’ve all failed. Things like Rumble and Kick are still going, and Kick may have a slight chance.

      But that’s a much smaller platform, that everyone agrees is absolute garbage and trying to kill itself at every turn. YouTube would be a much bigger challenge.

    • beefcat@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah I think most people thinking we can just replace YouTube do not understand the scale of their operation. What YouTube does is many many orders of magnitude bigger and more complex than anything happening on the fediverse. PeerTube is a joke by comparison. There is a reason that even when VC money was flowing like crazy, nobody was able to even think about launching a competitor.

      On top of that, no platform can seek to replace YouTube without offering the same or better creator compensation. Free services will never meet that.

    • dreikelvin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Someone needs to invent middle-out compression and install it on a network of smart fridges

    • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m not sure what it takes but TILVids doesn’t seem to have a problem loading videos…

      You might not get 4k but is that really important?

      • Afiefh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        TILVids has orders of magnitude less usage than YouTube, both in terms of storage and bandwidth.

        Generally speaking you can expect to hit one bottleneck or another whenever you grow one order of magnitude, and fixing these becomes harder each time.

        • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          TILVids has orders of magnitude less usage than YouTube, both in terms of storage and bandwidth.

          You’re not wrong but again, does that really matter? I can watch videos and they look just as good to my eye as they do on YT.

  • BornVolcano@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    The problem with YouTube is that people make real money off of their content, in an honest way. Unless you can match or exceed that level of income, you don’t have much of a chance of competing. People’s livelihoods would be at stake

    Reddit was big, but not profitable for users. At most, it was a social boost and marketing. That’s easily replaceable. Real, significant profiting, not so much.

  • gon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    I REALLY want there to be a better YT replacement on the fediverse or in some form of decentralized way.

    As people are pointing out, videos are very large files, and therefore very expensive to host. The fediverse can mitigate this a little bit, as everyone can host their own videos on their own server, but that’s not enough, and extremely inconvenient.

    I do wonder if the blockchain/torrents can be used here… I’m not a dev or anything so IDK how any of it really works, but I think something to that tune is gonna be the only way, since traditional servers don’t seem to be viable.

    • JshKlsn@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      The fediverse can mitigate this a little bit, as everyone can host their own videos on their own server, but that’s not enough, and extremely inconvenient.

      and still expensive as hell. Hopefully one of your videos doesn’t go slightly viral, or you’ll get a pretty huge bill from your VPS. Unless you own the infrastructure, you’re paying a huge penny to host video.

      Linus from LTT talked about it when it comes to FloatPlane. How stupidly expensive it is to host video.

      • gon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The fediverse can mitigate this a little bit, as everyone can host their own videos on their own server, but that’s not enough, and extremely inconvenient.

        Better than nothing for sure though.

    • Mubelotix@jlai.luOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You are right about torrents. Blockchains could be useful, but indirectly. For instance, Filecoin is a marketplace for decentralized storage. You can pay 1$ per TB per year, and the amount of storage can scale almost to infinity because as demand increase, price increase, and offer increase

    • Kichae@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I do wonder if the blockchain … can be used here

      In what way? To what effect? It’s not like blockchain magically makes videos small.

      • gon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I did say I don’t really know how it works😅… But here’s what I was thinking:

        My limited understanding is that the blockchain works as a ledger. Basically, a list that can verify or confirm the authenticity and provenance of files. The way it’s verified is by doing some very complicated math on some particular numbers with properties that allow for their authenticity to be verified but not forged. People have incentives to do this complicated math (that takes up power, time, money, etc.) because the blockchain rewards them with tokens or coins (which could be used to pay for special services on the platform, for example).

        So, yes, the blockchain doesn’t make files smaller, but it could work to verify their authenticity, and that they have not been tampered with. That way, anyone can host anyone’s videos, but the ledger would guarantee that the video is the “original”, as well as information about who first posted it, etc…

        So instead of videos being hosted on 1 server, videos could be downloaded and made available by anyone to anyone at any time. The videos aren’t smaller, but no 1 server would have more burden than any other, and it would be scalable since the users would host their favourite videos. Like torrenting?

        Maybe it’s not a useful tool in this case, IDK. It was just an ignorant suggestion really, as I said I’m not a dev and don’t actually understand any of this… I just want a better YT.

        • QHC@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          So, yes, the blockchain doesn’t make files smaller, but it could work to verify their authenticity, and that they have not been tampered with.

          As with every other suggested use of blockchain, there are already better ways to verify contents. It’s called hashing, it’s been around for decades, and we do it all the time.

          So instead of videos being hosted on 1 server, videos could be downloaded and made available by anyone to anyone at any time.

          This is going to run into all kinds of bottlenecks. Individual users may have a fast enough Internet connection to stream HD video, but uploading is often much slower. Even if not, one user could only co-host maybe 1-2 other users. Also, ISPs sure aren’t going to like all the increased bandwidth!

          People always vastly underestimate the bandwidth requirements for smooth, streaming video.

  • NeroToro@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    So for twitter it’s mastodon, for reddit it’s lemmy, for youtube odysee maybe, but what is it for facebook?

  • Gorilladrums@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    Mastadon, Searx, Fediverse, and so on aren’t killing or replacing the sites they’re modeled after, not even close. They’re just providing a privacy focused alternative for those who don’t want to whored out by corporations or abused by powermods or shitty business decisions

    • itsJoelle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      This response isn’t meant to be argumentative, I’m just learning:

      Isn’t the fredieverse have the issue of being not very private at all? Aren’t our up votes public? Is our viewing history freely available to those that maintain an instance?

      • Gorilladrums@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        They’re private in the sense that there isn’t a corporation stealing your data without your knowledge, selling it without your consent, whoring you out for ads against your will, and/or making your experience shittier to manipulate you into buying their paid features. These alternatives offer a much more pure experience for the typical user. Things like comment and vote history being public is just a part of the design of the forum, they’re not tools to farm your data.

        • iegod@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Is that true though? Any given instance could be running their own data collection.

          • Gorilladrums@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            They could, but they’re pretty much guaranteed to not be as bad as the big corporations because they lack the resources and know how. The fact that you could also host your own instance is a huge plus considering that you could basically ensure that your data won’t get collected.

        • MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          A corporation can still be “stealing” your data without your knowledge if info is public, it’s called Scraping

    • panCat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      No one said they are killing or replacing them , I moved to fediverse becuase the govt cant bully them into censoring certain content that was being removed from major SMs in my country

    • Wothe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Try WireMin, someone recommended it from another post. Its a decentralized version of FB, people described it as combination of Mastodon + Session.

      • E2EE messaging
      • Feed for blog post

      Decentralized network, So no central server to collect user data, and they can’t implement any restriction rules, so 0 banning and censorship

        • sebinspace@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I know there’s nothing wrong with those things, but the kind of people using the word “cancelling” and “free speech” are the kinds I try not to associate with

    • Stormy404@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago
      1. patreon
      2. most people make literal pennies off of youtube, so it wouldn’t be much for them to switch
    • dm_me_your_feet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Exactly. Youtube is there to stay, i think. I dont have many issues with it as well tbh. I pay for our family account and its just an amazing experience, no need for Spotify with YT Music as well. Creators earn more with premium too - the service is just working for me.

      One could debate about hosting costs and revenue split and content policies, but in principle, i have no qualms with Youtube.

      • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        YouTube probably isn’t worried about open source competition, but Twitch could be a real competitor. Twitch already captured a large chunk of gaming, especially the live streams.

        • verysoft@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          Twitch could have massively ate into YouTube if they wanted, but they must have decided it wasn’t worth the cost to host videos.

          • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            Twitch would need a lot of work to make videos more first class citizens, that is probably more the reason than storage costs. They have Amazon backing them now with basically unlimited storage potential.

      • Quentinp@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah paid YT is probably the last media subscription to go, especially with YT Music. Hours and hours of watch time probably number one thing watched by the whole family. The only problem I usually have with YT is getting “boxed in” to content, like it thinks I only like watching channel X now because I watched a video. Sometimes the entire feed is like 2 or 3 channels and it’s harder to discover something new.

        (One interesting thing, if you create your own YT channels each channel has a fresh watch history and sometimes you can then build up a different set of videos on the other channels)

      • cornholio@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Honestly the only subscription I don’t mind paying for. You can’t beat ad free YouTube videos.

          • EliasChao@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            You can also seamlessly download videos on all of your devices, on top of their own music streaming service.

            I’m sure you can get all of it for free somehow, but there’s a point in life that convenience is more important. Also, the family plan is dirt cheap if you consider all you get.

  • sol@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Peertube already exist. If you have to upload a video to show someone on the internet it’s already more convenient than youtube as you don’t have to login and access with google accounts.

      • sol@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think so. Creating accounts on Peertube is much easier as it’s decentralized, some instances won’t care about your data such telephone number

      • this@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        You can. You can’t subscribe or use it ad free but I have no issues going to YouTube and just searching for what I need. No account required.

  • RoyalEngineering@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    I would love a decentralized TikTok replacement. Aside from everybody’s privacy complaints, TikTok has a really addictive delivery model.

    I would think that short video clips would be easier to federate than beefy 4k video files.

  • egeres@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    In the case of a decentralized youtube, who would be responsible for the data storage?

    • TheRedSpade@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Each instance, as with the rest of the fediverse. It already exists, btw. Look up Peertube if you’re curious.

      • egeres@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I didn’t know about this, thanks for the heads up!! But, with this decentralized approach, if a peertube node “dies”, could those videos be saved in a different node? I guess one of my biggest concerns with the fediverse is that fragmenting the network might also lead to fragility of content

          • egeres@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Oof, that might be a solid roadblock limiting peertube/fediverse. Decentralization sounds great as a greediness deterrence system, but it also feels like lesser nodes will be more prone to stop maintenance over many years, making decentralize content more fragile than centralized. I wonder if a way to counterattack this is via enabling posts mirroring and content transfer among fediverse instances… 🤔

            • Shapillon@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Otoh do we need perfect (or even good) persistence for the 36284th similar bbq tuto or some random-ass cat video?

              • egeres@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I get that point! But imagine “ancient youtube history videos” like “chocolate rain” were hosted on an old and unstable peertube node. I would find it sad that a decentralized infrastructure erased old and historic eras of the internet. I’m not saying this just defeats the whole fediverse, I just find it a point of concern, I’m sure if it is really a problem the developers and community will find approaches to mitigate it!

                (Btw, I’m not yet well informed about all the caveats/tradeoffs/unwritten rules of lemmy/mastodon/peertube when it comes to data storage, so maybe what I’m saying just doesn’t make sense at all, correct me if I’m wrong!!)

                • Shapillon@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  My bet is that if a video is famous it’s gonna get replicated. And if it doesn’t, well, it will join the unending list of lost medias.

                  Anyway we just can’t archive anything anyone produces forever.

        • ZenkorSoraz@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Youtube as others noted isnt as evil as reddit or others, but peertube could be a good augmentation to youtube which stores loads of data. However Internet Archive stores alot of data as does Wikipedia don’t know how though. You could also pay per video, one cent per video no subscription just own what you buy. Or you could find way of compressing video data consumption files like is done with png and obsidian files. Or merge ads with content but with a marketplace anyone who wants to sale a product can post to specilized instants for sales and only those who want to buy would be subscribed to for profit instances.

          • panCat@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think ads need to be the way to go for a peer video sharing platform , maybe less intrusive ads but they need to be there , else it will be very hard for many creators to make money

      • astral_avocado@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        So if every instance helps stream videos to a single client via a torrent protocol, that still means every instance needs to individually store all videos for all the servers it federates with. Sounds like it solves bandwidth as an issue but storage is still absolutely a problem.