4 ms·
This time is different, because hackers are more likely to have the ability to solve this problem (even if it weren't for the fact that YT already solved it onc
by Nuzzerino 7y ago
This time is different, because hackers are more likely to have the ability to solve this problem (even if it weren't for the fact that YT already solved it once more than a decade ago). YT probably made a big mistake here.
- sn41 7y agoIf I understand correctly, YT is able to solve it because it has huge data centers which can cache the videos at appropriate locations all around the world. Honest query: do you think an individual/small group can replicate this? Perhaps GNU can take this up as an initiative.
- IceWreck 7y agoGNU doesn't have the money to pull this off
- superkuh 7y agoIt's already been solved by the groups using the torrent system to create apps which allow "streaming" torrents. But every time one of these pops up it's immediately struck down by legal blows.
- izacus 7y agoYou don't need to cache videos at all if you're small enough. If you don't have YT volume, you also don't have to pay as much for bandwidth. It's also the only way to stay independent from advertiser interests.
- tastroder 7y agoPretty doubtful about that tbh. Yes, the hacking type can likely solve "host video" for people to watch, maybe even "make it streamable without ruining my resources" but they usually aren't as apt w.r.t. user experience, SEO, and a multitude of other aspects that capture an audience. Shameful as I might find it, independent sites also don't offer nearly the reach a platform like YouTube does these days. Add to that the fact that we're talking about a niche topic here, it's unlikely to affect youtube in any non-philosophical manner.