3 ms·

I still stand by my earlier suggestion - break away from Alphabet; release videos directly through archive.org & Wikimedia.

by Endy 8y ago

themodelplumber 8y ago
Just to try it out, would this be an example of the kind of result you'd see at Archive.org? https://archive.org/details/CaminandesLlamigos https://archive.org/details/CaminandesLlamigos
- Endy 8y ago
  Pretty much, I was more thinking about these: https://archive.org/details/lets-play https://archive.org/details/lets-play But, yes. And there's already at least some version of Big Buck Bunny up there, so it's not like there isn't Blender content in the Archive.
  - Vinnl 8y ago
    I was expecting some crappy 90s interface that was just a static listing of links to download videos or something like that, but this actually looks pretty good.
    - Endy 8y ago
      Isn't it nice when your expectations are exceeded? But seriously, Archive.org has done a lot in the last few years to improve its multimedia streaming - take a look at some of the music, radio shows, and audiobooks they have up there.
      - AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
        Not to mention integrated WebApp DosBOX.
  - tyfon 8y ago
    That's pretty neat. I wonder what happens if it starts to being used like youtube. I see the top LP has 37k views, that's about as much as a video from a medium tier youtuber. The cost of storing/processing/serving videos is quite high. On a side note, I have finally gotten youtube red in my country and I immediately signed on. Will it send money to the "demonetised" videos that can't have adds or are they screwed out of youtube red money as well?
josteink 8y ago
> I still stand by my earlier suggestion - break away from Alphabet With internet video now just a <video>-tag and a CDN away, I really don't understand why people have such a hard time doing this.
- wencha 8y ago
  Because bandwidth is super expensive.
  - josteink 8y ago
    Unless you're a very big player handling excessive amounts of users, the bandwidth involved doesn't need to cost an arm and a leg. I can see why private individuals might prefer something free, but for organizations or other professional actors which are publishing high-quality video-productions, they already have a budget, and frankly the BW cost is probably going to be the smallest expense on their list. And when they risk losing their platform and audience at a whim (as we've seen Google do repeatedly to certain types of organizations over at YouTube), I can't see why more people don't consider other options which leaves them in full control over their own content.
- brainwad 8y ago
  Because that is a bare minimum solution that only works via web. YouTube provides native clients for mobile, TVs, consoles, etc. Also, because Google pays you to host your videos, if you are willing to allow advertising.
  - Endy 8y ago
    I mean, given what Blender is, having tutorial videos accessible by anything other than desktop browsing isn't a hopeless or horrible thing. Every Blender user has a desktop or laptop (or has modded something to heck and back in order to run Blender), so having it be somewhat difficult to access a majority of their videos by mobile, TV, console, etc, might not be such a big loss.
    - 8y ago
rmc 8y ago
There's PeerTube software, which is self hosting, and people's browsers use in-browser bittorrent to share video amoung people who are watching the video. Blender have set one up: https://video.blender.org/ https://video.blender.org/
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
  How well does that work when a video isn't very popular though? The value of a thing like youtube is that anybody can put a video on there and it will be available for anybody else to play, instantly, for the foreseeable future.
  - raziel2p 8y ago
    I imagine the non-popular videos are sent directly from central servers. By offloading the most popular spikes to P2P maybe they're able to reduce costs enough to make it worth it.
- hesselink 8y ago
  Interesting, it doesn't seem to work here because my employer's VPN blocks the torrents.
  - Endy 8y ago
    To add to that, there's also the fact that any user of any ISP that throttles/blocks torrent traffic is probably going to have the same experience. Plus the fact that there's at least two people I know whose ISPs actually cut users' down speed by double of any up speed (in order to "passively" cut down torrenting without actually restricting it). So PeerTube becomes less a YouTube replacement and more an interesting implementation of streaming video via Bittorrent (which some clients already support).

I still stand by my earlier suggestion - break away from Alphabet; release videos directly through archive.org & Wikimedia.

by Endy 8y ago

I still stand by my earlier suggestion - break away from Alphabet; release videos directly through archive.org & Wikimedia.

themodelplumber 8y ago

Just to try it out, would this be an example of the kind of result you'd see at Archive.org? https://archive.org/details/CaminandesLlamigos https://archive.org/details/CaminandesLlamigos

Endy 8y ago
Pretty much, I was more thinking about these: https://archive.org/details/lets-play https://archive.org/details/lets-play But, yes. And there's already at least some version of Big Buck Bunny up there, so it's not like there isn't Blender content in the Archive.
- Vinnl 8y ago
  I was expecting some crappy 90s interface that was just a static listing of links to download videos or something like that, but this actually looks pretty good.
  - Endy 8y ago
    Isn't it nice when your expectations are exceeded? But seriously, Archive.org has done a lot in the last few years to improve its multimedia streaming - take a look at some of the music, radio shows, and audiobooks they have up there.
    - AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
      Not to mention integrated WebApp DosBOX.
- tyfon 8y ago
  That's pretty neat. I wonder what happens if it starts to being used like youtube. I see the top LP has 37k views, that's about as much as a video from a medium tier youtuber. The cost of storing/processing/serving videos is quite high. On a side note, I have finally gotten youtube red in my country and I immediately signed on. Will it send money to the "demonetised" videos that can't have adds or are they screwed out of youtube red money as well?

josteink 8y ago

> I still stand by my earlier suggestion - break away from Alphabet With internet video now just a <video>-tag and a CDN away, I really don't understand why people have such a hard time doing this.

wencha 8y ago
Because bandwidth is super expensive.
- josteink 8y ago
  Unless you're a very big player handling excessive amounts of users, the bandwidth involved doesn't need to cost an arm and a leg. I can see why private individuals might prefer something free, but for organizations or other professional actors which are publishing high-quality video-productions, they already have a budget, and frankly the BW cost is probably going to be the smallest expense on their list. And when they risk losing their platform and audience at a whim (as we've seen Google do repeatedly to certain types of organizations over at YouTube), I can't see why more people don't consider other options which leaves them in full control over their own content.
brainwad 8y ago
Because that is a bare minimum solution that only works via web. YouTube provides native clients for mobile, TVs, consoles, etc. Also, because Google pays you to host your videos, if you are willing to allow advertising.
- Endy 8y ago
  I mean, given what Blender is, having tutorial videos accessible by anything other than desktop browsing isn't a hopeless or horrible thing. Every Blender user has a desktop or laptop (or has modded something to heck and back in order to run Blender), so having it be somewhat difficult to access a majority of their videos by mobile, TV, console, etc, might not be such a big loss.
  - 8y ago

rmc 8y ago

There's PeerTube software, which is self hosting, and people's browsers use in-browser bittorrent to share video amoung people who are watching the video. Blender have set one up: https://video.blender.org/ https://video.blender.org/

AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
How well does that work when a video isn't very popular though? The value of a thing like youtube is that anybody can put a video on there and it will be available for anybody else to play, instantly, for the foreseeable future.
- raziel2p 8y ago
  I imagine the non-popular videos are sent directly from central servers. By offloading the most popular spikes to P2P maybe they're able to reduce costs enough to make it worth it.
hesselink 8y ago
Interesting, it doesn't seem to work here because my employer's VPN blocks the torrents.
- Endy 8y ago
  To add to that, there's also the fact that any user of any ISP that throttles/blocks torrent traffic is probably going to have the same experience. Plus the fact that there's at least two people I know whose ISPs actually cut users' down speed by double of any up speed (in order to "passively" cut down torrenting without actually restricting it). So PeerTube becomes less a YouTube replacement and more an interesting implementation of streaming video via Bittorrent (which some clients already support).