5 ms·

I think you answered your own question. YouTube is running the risk of turning into a sterile, corporate mall. Soon enough an edgier, more tolerant alternativ

I think you answered your own question. YouTube is running the risk of turning into a sterile, corporate mall. Soon enough an edgier, more tolerant alternative will pop up and start attracting eyeballs.

TheOtherHobbes 7y ago
YT is running the risk of its content creators organising themselves into an industry association with legal and financial teeth, and suing its profits into oblivion.
- IAmGraydon 7y ago
  On what grounds? I disagree with Youtube’s actions here, but no one is forcing them to publish on YT.
  - Barrin92 7y ago
    The competition to youtube is virtually nonexistent. If you're a medium or small content creator (which most youtube creators are), then instead of deciding to go to vimeo you might as well just file for unemployment benefits. And the network effects of youtube will ensure that this continues to be the case. Content creators aren't organised, so a mass exodus won't happen.
    - fock 7y ago
      So maybe the concept of a medium or small content creator isn't profitable in our current pop-capitalistic system; I guess you are suggesting changing this system, because at the moment this process repeats, what has happened to 1000s of businesses (most recently small farms) in the real world too. Still people elect the ones being paid for by the profiteers very reliably year after year
  - gbear605 7y ago
    Youtube has a monopoly on the online video market. There are other ways to publish but not other ways to get viewers.
- 0xADEADBEE 7y ago
  It was my understanding that YouTube isn't profitable; has there been any new data on this that I've missed? Lack of similar-sized competitors in the space would certainly indicate that the margins don't really stack up and you could make an argument that the aggressive foisting of their premium offering underscores that notion, but I don't know for sure. It'd be interesting to know more about operating a site of that nature at that scale but I don't suppose that sort of data will make it out any time soon!
  - michaelmrose 7y ago
    If they aren't profitable now they can always become an increasingly large money sink.
  - throwaway2048 7y ago
    There has been the ghost of this argument floating around for more than a decade at this point, based on the idea that Google pays for youtube bandwidth (due to peering, they don't). If Google was losing money on youtube they wouldn't pay out billions a year to video creators in the face of zero competition.
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  How big a risk is that really? Exploiting the other side's inability to coordinate seems like a standard business trick these days. All they need to do is to pay attention and do some token changes to the product or ToS every now and then, disrupting any attempt of creators at organizing themselves. They can keep at it forever.
  - xemdetia 7y ago
    I have never found data on whether or not the YouTube legal entity is an independent thing while the add supplier is a separate entity they can happily say they make no money to take for their other legal exposures that YouTube generates. There's also the fun outcome that tomorrow YouTube is sunset the moment the creators start being properly organized because like you mention the jig would be up.
- imtringued 7y ago
  What will they sue YT for? The creators aren't employed by YT and therefore YT doesn't owe them a cent. Copyright law doesn't forbid over-blocking or demonetization and the new EU Copyright directive explicitly forbids under-blocking. The only thing those creators can do is leave YT and let it die from a lack of content. They don't have any legal or financial teeth at all.
wswkb 7y ago
Recoding and hosting and transmitting video is so expensive that I can assure you no alternative will ever pop up.
- RubberbandSoul 7y ago
  BitChute?
  - dymk 7y ago
    Do you think that self hosting a video streaming server is going to be attainable for content creators? Simply setting up DNs is hard for the layman.
    - TheOtherHobbes 7y ago
      There's no technical reason someone couldn't put together a WordPress-for-Video system - or even add video to Wordpress. (Although that would almost certainly suck for performance reasons.) The big problem is discovery. A lot of people are wondering about decentralised server networks with an open discovery/search system built on top. That's a horrendously hard project for social as well as technical reasons. But it's badly needed to drag the web out of the corporate swamp it's currently drowning in.
      - zaroth 7y ago
        I’d say the problem is less discovery as it is monetization. The total bandwidth for one of these creators’ videos is not itself all that massive. Particularly if you are not live streaming, a few thousand dollars in hosting costs a year to get 100TB/mo dedicated servers in a couple datacenters. But once you have the servers humming and serving a few million views a month, whose ads are you running alongside your content?
        cameronbrown 7y ago
        Patreon has proved people are willing to pay for content. We just need an easier way to do it.
tomatotomato37 7y ago
What's the current consensus of LiveLeaks being the edgier alternative?
tlogan 7y ago
Definitely. One example is Twitch - It seems like Twitch is growing while YouTube Gaming is shrining [1]. The trick to find the niche and be 10x better than youtube for that niche and then expand from there. [1] https://techcrunch.com/2018/04/26/twitch-solidifies-its-lead-with-viewership-up-21-in-q1-while-youtube-gaming-drops/ https://techcrunch.com/2018/04/26/twitch-solidifies-its-lead...

TheOtherHobbes 7y ago

YT is running the risk of its content creators organising themselves into an industry association with legal and financial teeth, and suing its profits into oblivion.

IAmGraydon 7y ago
On what grounds? I disagree with Youtube’s actions here, but no one is forcing them to publish on YT.
- Barrin92 7y ago
  The competition to youtube is virtually nonexistent. If you're a medium or small content creator (which most youtube creators are), then instead of deciding to go to vimeo you might as well just file for unemployment benefits. And the network effects of youtube will ensure that this continues to be the case. Content creators aren't organised, so a mass exodus won't happen.
  - fock 7y ago
    So maybe the concept of a medium or small content creator isn't profitable in our current pop-capitalistic system; I guess you are suggesting changing this system, because at the moment this process repeats, what has happened to 1000s of businesses (most recently small farms) in the real world too. Still people elect the ones being paid for by the profiteers very reliably year after year
- gbear605 7y ago
  Youtube has a monopoly on the online video market. There are other ways to publish but not other ways to get viewers.
0xADEADBEE 7y ago
It was my understanding that YouTube isn't profitable; has there been any new data on this that I've missed? Lack of similar-sized competitors in the space would certainly indicate that the margins don't really stack up and you could make an argument that the aggressive foisting of their premium offering underscores that notion, but I don't know for sure. It'd be interesting to know more about operating a site of that nature at that scale but I don't suppose that sort of data will make it out any time soon!
- michaelmrose 7y ago
  If they aren't profitable now they can always become an increasingly large money sink.
- throwaway2048 7y ago
  There has been the ghost of this argument floating around for more than a decade at this point, based on the idea that Google pays for youtube bandwidth (due to peering, they don't). If Google was losing money on youtube they wouldn't pay out billions a year to video creators in the face of zero competition.
TeMPOraL 7y ago
How big a risk is that really? Exploiting the other side's inability to coordinate seems like a standard business trick these days. All they need to do is to pay attention and do some token changes to the product or ToS every now and then, disrupting any attempt of creators at organizing themselves. They can keep at it forever.
- xemdetia 7y ago
  I have never found data on whether or not the YouTube legal entity is an independent thing while the add supplier is a separate entity they can happily say they make no money to take for their other legal exposures that YouTube generates. There's also the fun outcome that tomorrow YouTube is sunset the moment the creators start being properly organized because like you mention the jig would be up.
imtringued 7y ago
What will they sue YT for? The creators aren't employed by YT and therefore YT doesn't owe them a cent. Copyright law doesn't forbid over-blocking or demonetization and the new EU Copyright directive explicitly forbids under-blocking. The only thing those creators can do is leave YT and let it die from a lack of content. They don't have any legal or financial teeth at all.

wswkb 7y ago

Recoding and hosting and transmitting video is so expensive that I can assure you no alternative will ever pop up.

RubberbandSoul 7y ago
BitChute?
- dymk 7y ago
  Do you think that self hosting a video streaming server is going to be attainable for content creators? Simply setting up DNs is hard for the layman.
  - TheOtherHobbes 7y ago
    There's no technical reason someone couldn't put together a WordPress-for-Video system - or even add video to Wordpress. (Although that would almost certainly suck for performance reasons.) The big problem is discovery. A lot of people are wondering about decentralised server networks with an open discovery/search system built on top. That's a horrendously hard project for social as well as technical reasons. But it's badly needed to drag the web out of the corporate swamp it's currently drowning in.
    - zaroth 7y ago
      I’d say the problem is less discovery as it is monetization. The total bandwidth for one of these creators’ videos is not itself all that massive. Particularly if you are not live streaming, a few thousand dollars in hosting costs a year to get 100TB/mo dedicated servers in a couple datacenters. But once you have the servers humming and serving a few million views a month, whose ads are you running alongside your content?
      - cameronbrown 7y ago
        Patreon has proved people are willing to pay for content. We just need an easier way to do it.

tomatotomato37 7y ago

What's the current consensus of LiveLeaks being the edgier alternative?

tlogan 7y ago

Definitely. One example is Twitch - It seems like Twitch is growing while YouTube Gaming is shrining [1]. The trick to find the niche and be 10x better than youtube for that niche and then expand from there. [1] https://techcrunch.com/2018/04/26/twitch-solidifies-its-lead-with-viewership-up-21-in-q1-while-youtube-gaming-drops/ https://techcrunch.com/2018/04/26/twitch-solidifies-its-lead...