4 ms·

Someone please do this. (You'll probably need a lot of money.) In the meantime, download anything you enjoy today, because it may not be there tomorrow.

dvt 9y ago
If you have traction, the money will come. But really, what can you do that's better than YouTube? Honest question. I think that YouTube has reached Google levels of optimization. Sure, it could be better, but not better enough that people are willing to switch.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > But really, what can you do that's better than YouTube? For any specialized market, probably a lot; YouTube may be the ultimate least-common-denominator user-submitted-video streaming service, but it's not the only one there is room for.
  - dvt 9y ago
    > For any specialized market, probably a lot This is doubly true for services like Google Search, and yet (for example) security-oriented engines like DDG are barely making a dent. I honestly don't think niche is the way to go if you're trying to go after Google/YouTube/Facebook. You'd need to figure out a core issue or core need that has been overlooked. And I just don't really see one.
    - dragonwriter 9y ago
      > This is doubly true for services like Google Search, and yet (for example) security-oriented engines like DDG are barely making a dent. DDG is making a huge dent in the narrow segment it is designed to appeal to, which is all any specialized service can hope for. I think DDG fans persistently overestimate how many people find Google’s personalization a net cost. > I honestly don't think niche is the way to go if you're trying to go after Google/YouTube/Facebook. You'd need to figure out a core issue or core need that has been overlooked. Sure, if you are trying to replace one of those as the dominant mass market player in its domain you need to do that. Also, I think you are more likely to find a core need by dealing with a need that seems niche but is really just more pronounced and visible in that particular niche than by digging around in the dark for a core need.
      - dvt 9y ago
        > Sure, if you are trying to replace one of those as the dominant mass market player in its domain you need to do that. The parent post was discussing disrupting the major player -- YouTube. Me making some tiny website that caters to videos of, say, amateur astronomy, while interesting and successful in its own right, would not so much as make a dent (let alone disrupt) YouTube. That was my point: that disrupting YouTube (like disrupting Google) seems, to me, nigh impossible.
        exDM69 9y ago
        It's not just disrupting YouTube, it's also about creating a sustainable service. Video streaming has enormous costs which you need to get back somehow. Unless your niche audience is willing to pay per minute, it is going to be difficult to pay the bills.
Scoundreller 9y ago
It sounds like there will be a huge opportunity for howto/DIY videos that people don't really subscribe to. Google isn't removing any videos, but they are using the demonetized videos as bait to get you to watch their monetized videos.
CryoLogic 9y ago
Bandwidth prices are dropping every year, but ATM it's very difficult to be profitable with video streaming. Like crazy hard. 200k views of a 250mb video is 40tb bandwidth which is $3600-$4600 streaming from Amazon S3 depending on if you use CloudFront or not. You basically need your own data centers and wholesale bandwidth, aka scale.
- jopsen 9y ago
  Amazon is pretty expensive for bandwidth, scaleway.com sells cheap VMs and baremetal with 200 MBit/s unmetered bandwidth at like 3 EUR/mo. Building a reliable service, handling peak, etc. is hard, and driving down latency will probably cost more... But 40TB can be done a lot cheaper than 3-4k USD.
  - c0rkscrew 9y ago
    >scaleway.com sells cheap VMs and baremetal with 200 MBit/s unmetered bandwidth I'm sure if you rented hundreds of those and actually used the bandwidth they would kick you out.

dvt 9y ago

If you have traction, the money will come. But really, what can you do that's better than YouTube? Honest question. I think that YouTube has reached Google levels of optimization. Sure, it could be better, but not better enough that people are willing to switch.

dragonwriter 9y ago
> But really, what can you do that's better than YouTube? For any specialized market, probably a lot; YouTube may be the ultimate least-common-denominator user-submitted-video streaming service, but it's not the only one there is room for.
- dvt 9y ago
  > For any specialized market, probably a lot This is doubly true for services like Google Search, and yet (for example) security-oriented engines like DDG are barely making a dent. I honestly don't think niche is the way to go if you're trying to go after Google/YouTube/Facebook. You'd need to figure out a core issue or core need that has been overlooked. And I just don't really see one.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > This is doubly true for services like Google Search, and yet (for example) security-oriented engines like DDG are barely making a dent. DDG is making a huge dent in the narrow segment it is designed to appeal to, which is all any specialized service can hope for. I think DDG fans persistently overestimate how many people find Google’s personalization a net cost. > I honestly don't think niche is the way to go if you're trying to go after Google/YouTube/Facebook. You'd need to figure out a core issue or core need that has been overlooked. Sure, if you are trying to replace one of those as the dominant mass market player in its domain you need to do that. Also, I think you are more likely to find a core need by dealing with a need that seems niche but is really just more pronounced and visible in that particular niche than by digging around in the dark for a core need.
    - dvt 9y ago
      > Sure, if you are trying to replace one of those as the dominant mass market player in its domain you need to do that. The parent post was discussing disrupting the major player -- YouTube. Me making some tiny website that caters to videos of, say, amateur astronomy, while interesting and successful in its own right, would not so much as make a dent (let alone disrupt) YouTube. That was my point: that disrupting YouTube (like disrupting Google) seems, to me, nigh impossible.
      - exDM69 9y ago
        It's not just disrupting YouTube, it's also about creating a sustainable service. Video streaming has enormous costs which you need to get back somehow. Unless your niche audience is willing to pay per minute, it is going to be difficult to pay the bills.

Scoundreller 9y ago

It sounds like there will be a huge opportunity for howto/DIY videos that people don't really subscribe to. Google isn't removing any videos, but they are using the demonetized videos as bait to get you to watch their monetized videos.

CryoLogic 9y ago

Bandwidth prices are dropping every year, but ATM it's very difficult to be profitable with video streaming. Like crazy hard. 200k views of a 250mb video is 40tb bandwidth which is $3600-$4600 streaming from Amazon S3 depending on if you use CloudFront or not. You basically need your own data centers and wholesale bandwidth, aka scale.

jopsen 9y ago
Amazon is pretty expensive for bandwidth, scaleway.com sells cheap VMs and baremetal with 200 MBit/s unmetered bandwidth at like 3 EUR/mo. Building a reliable service, handling peak, etc. is hard, and driving down latency will probably cost more... But 40TB can be done a lot cheaper than 3-4k USD.
- c0rkscrew 9y ago
  >scaleway.com sells cheap VMs and baremetal with 200 MBit/s unmetered bandwidth I'm sure if you rented hundreds of those and actually used the bandwidth they would kick you out.