8 ms·
Alternative Video Sites : https://lbry.tv/ https://lbry.tv/ https://www.dailymotion.com/ https://www.dailymotion.com/ https://www.bitchute.com/ https://www.b
by deadalus 6y ago
Alternative Video Sites :
https://lbry.tv/ https://lbry.tv/
https://www.dailymotion.com/ https://www.dailymotion.com/
https://www.bitchute.com/ https://www.bitchute.com/
https://dlive.tv/ https://dlive.tv/
https://bittube.tv/ https://bittube.tv/
- wlll 6y agoWhat's the audience like on those? I assume pretty small compared to YouTube.
- laksdjfkasljdf 6y agoAnd you can be part of the solution! Isn't this nice?
- katbyte 6y agobeing part of the solution doesn't pay the bills
- deadalus 6y agoLBRY is viable for creators and the videos cannot be taken down permanently : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jyhy4Bcqgg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jyhy4Bcqgg
- vaccinator 6y agoDoesn't https://lbry.tv/ https://lbry.tv/ host this video?
- j4nt4b 6y agoPaying the bills by being part of the problem is a personal decision
- ultrarunner 6y agoNeither does being de-platformed.
- lucb1e 6y agoDoes it have to? Can we not have content made by whoever feels like it, like many of the articles popular on HN are not for profit, none of the (often insightful) comments are, the plethora of games and tools people create and share for free, etc.? For professional videos, until there is a law that specifies that a monopoly (currently Google YouTube does seem like the only place where money making is possible) has to follow certain rules, they can throw you out for virtually any reason and it's not a secure way of making a living. So maybe it should be, but it currently isn't, and we can't currently force them to be. Other platforms may not significantly help one to pay bills, I'm just wondering if that might not be okay given the sheer number of people who seem to have fun doing this. If not, we should make new laws.
- eropple 6y ago> Can we not have content made by whoever feels like it Sure! We can definitely have charity content. Most of the content out there is. Somebody's paying for most of the content most people want to watch, though.
- lucb1e 6y agoYou mean paying bandwidth-wise? Because if you want bittorrent... we can do bittorrent. Bandwidth doesn't need to cost anything and can be made to prefer intra-ISP traffic quite easily. Better for everyone.
- eropple 6y agoI mean paying for its existence; most of the content people consume is paid-for content whether by advertising (in one form or another) or direct support via Patreon and similar. And the reasons for this are ones I know firsthand; I am a video producer as well as a software developer. I could not afford to do the former without being the latter. Building a A reasonable-quality single-camera A/V rig that a video producer would actually want to work with is comfortably in the middle four digits. Three cameras, low five. That money must come from somewhere, as must the rationalization for the time in a world as productized and generally fucked as ours, and "that's OK, art and media can just be done by wildly wealthy dilettantes in their spare time" is a shitty world.
- Igelau 6y agoI like to imagine what the trade names of the future are going to be. When you meet someone on the Mars colony whose last name is Tuber and that bit of Snapple (best stuff off earth!) Cap wisdom perks up in your brain: "why, their great-grandpappy must have been one of the YouTube personalities on the first ship!" I think it was prompted by seeing the name "Hodler" once and thinking it sounded like the cryptocurrency equivalent of Wainwright or Cooper.
- vaccinator 6y agoAfter the initial setup, it doesn't cost much to post your videos on all platforms
- BGZq7 6y agoYou can post to YouTube and also another platform, then on Patreon/Twitter/Facebook/etc always link the other platform instead of YouTube. That way you would still be discoverable on YouTube, but hopefully get some amount of traffic funneled over to the other platform in case YouTube kicks you off.
- bsder 6y agoGetting taken down on YouTube means you have an audience of zero. So, bigger than that.
- wlll 6y agoYou're technically correct, but that's not really relevant. 0 < 1 < 780,000 for sure, but that's also the difference between making a living and not. YouTube, like it or not, is the engine that drives many people's content business (the creators), and if the engine is denied to them, there really isn't a realistic alternative.
- bsder 6y agoYou either overthrow The King, or you depend on his largesse and submit to his whims. "We don't care. We don't have to. We're Google." https://vimeo.com/355556831 https://vimeo.com/355556831
- wlll 6y agoWhat does "overthrow the king" look like when the alternatives are uploading your videos to other sites and getting a handful of views? It's like the alternative really is "depend on his largesse and submit to his whims beacuse you can't overthrow the king because he is too powerful". Like it or not YouTube is in an extremely solid position that is unlikely to be shifted by anyone at this point.
- dvtrn 6y agoWhat does "overthrow the king" look like I often hear the “host your own content” but I don’t feel like there is an equally vocal “make it discoverable, too” crowd. That is until I discovered the indieweb. The indieweb’s usage of microformats and features like “webmentions” that can be crawled ad hoc, enabling decentralized, federated discovery (example: http://indieweb.xyz http://indieweb.xyz) is the web that-IMO-we should have gotten. Not one dominated by corporatized, professionalized platforms
- 6y ago
- jansan 6y agoFor Bitchute you can directly compare the views of videos by Styxhexenhammer666, who seems to be most watched content creator on Bitchute. Numbers seem to be roughly 12 to 1 in favor of YouTube. Still, we need people to start contributing to alternative platforms. The YouTube monopoly only benefits Google.
- munk-a 6y agoThe video discovery is the part that really hurts creators there. Youtube is a bunch of stuff nobody cares about attached to that landing page that advertises videos and which billions (I think? hundreds of millions at least) of people pass through every day. There are great ways to host video for free on the internet these days so if you want to preserve some video or link it in somewhere (I've seen vimeo used as a hosting platform for tutorial videos on sites) then you have much better option than YouTube - but if your business is the videos then you either need to survive on YT or else get big enough to splinter. Given how Dlive (pwediepie) and Nebula (technical vlog folks) haven't taken off that well I'm guessing you'll need a lot more behind you to go indy - those subscriptions (hit the bell icon!) and the feed are the feature YT sells.
- ainar-g 6y agohttps://vimeo.com/ https://vimeo.com/? Although they seem to market themselves more towards the indie filmmaker market.
- wishinghand 6y agoThey have live streaming available now, which is more of a Twitch thing than even a Youtube thing, though YT does offer it.
- Dylan16807 6y agoLive streaming is more in line with the twitch brand, but youtube's implementation is significantly better, at least on the client side. There's no live rewinding on twitch, or pausing for a minute and then catching back up at 1.25x or 1.5x
- gputhrowaway630 6y agoIt's true that you can't pause a stream on Twitch, but Twitch allows you to save clips that are functionally equivalent to rewinding, which isn't available on YouTube. Twitch's UX&I is also much better suited to streaming than YouTube (bigger chat, multiple viewing sizes/configurations, no video suggestions).
- Dylan16807 6y agoI could go through the awkward process of making a clip every time I miss something and want to rewind a few seconds, but once I do that now I've missed even more of the broadcast and there's no way to catch up. Twitch only works comfortably for completely live viewing, watching finished VODs, or watching ongoing VODS with half an hour delay minimum. Clips are a neat feature but they're a sharing feature, not a "help me watch" feature.
- rexreed 6y agoYes - why don't more people use Vimeo? I know that they have limits on uploads, especially on the free tier, but it's worth paying for because at least they know you're a customer and not a product. For $900 a year you get 7 TB of video and unlimited live streaming. Yes, YouTube is cheaper (free) and brings a large audience. So you have to balance paying for something that's certain or being at the whim of the market maker.
- CryoLogic 6y agohttps://anim8.io https://anim8.io for animators and animation fans - we are fully funded by fans and members vote on features and direction!
- TheSpiceIsLife 6y agoHeads up, grammar error on your landing page: We have an large Should be: We have a large
- vaccinator 6y agohttps://Ibry.tv https://Ibry.tv appears to be worst then CNN... ideally it would worst then Fox too
- y2bd 6y agoA heads up/warning that you linked to "i" as in eye-bry.tv, which appears to be a scam website.
- 1_player 6y agoThat's unfortunate as "ibry" would at least be more pronounceable than "lbry". Trying to challenge YouTube with a very user-unfriendly name is an endeavour that's doomed to fail.
- vaccinator 6y agoi can't edit my comment because HN won't let me... so many rules on this site, almost like kids designed it
- CyberRabbi 6y agoUnfortunately none of them pay like YouTube!
- thotsBgone 6y agoThey pay better than YouTube if you also post to Youtube.
- teh_klev 6y agoUm, how does that happen when YouTube arbitrarily close your account?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- Polylactic_acid 6y agoThats why most youtubers moved to patreon for their money.
- CyberRabbi 6y agoMost haven’t
- _fs 6y agoSo, of those sites, I had only heard of dailymotion. The others I had never visited before, so they will have no history on me, and will get clean recommendations. Upon going to each one, here's what I got: lbry.tv - Shows 6 videos on the front page above the fold. 3 are appear to be strongly political, and 1 is pushing a far right conspiracy. NEXT. bitchute.com - Front page appears to be entirely far right propaganda and conspiracy theories. Lots of race baiting. NEXT diive.tv - Front page appears to indicate this is a streaming site ala twitch.tv. Mostly game videos on front page, along with 3 race riot videos. Due to titles about "no-go zones", I assume they are all going to be far right propaganda. bittube.tv - Half of the videos on the front page are not in English. Not a bad thing, but surprising to me. The rest of the videos seem to be focusing on bitcoin scams, bill gates vaccines, and videos calling the corona-virus a left wing conspiracy. Based on what I have seen, I now assume most of these sites are for people banned from Youtube for spouting far-right propaganda. Would not recommend any of them, and will likely not be back.
- GhostVII 6y agoI think the problem is that of the people removed from YouTube, the vast majority are going to be removed for unsavory or misleading content, so any alternative anti-censorship sites are dominated by those people. You have the same problem with Reddit vs something like Voat. It would be cool if these sites were able to mirror all of the youtube content as well, so you get all of youtube plus the content that people are posting to the decentralized or anti-censorship platform. Probably illegal but that's kind of the point.
- duskwuff 6y agoAs far as I can remember, Voat has always courted the alt-right segment. The fact that they became a haven for extremist content wasn't an accident.
- samatman 6y agoYeah, this is part of YouTube's moat. Twitter as well. Of the people who get kicked off of those platforms, a significant number will be socially obnoxious. They of course have "freedom of speech but not freedom of reach", and our legal structure has decided that the big platforms get to enjoy being both a platform and a publisher, simultaneously. So when a competitor comes along, the natural way to differentiate is to say "we won't ban you unless you break the law". So the socially obnoxious flood to the new plaform, and pretty quickly, you've got a core user base of people who like that, and a few people who are merely willing to tolerate it on principle. I don't think this was originally strategic, more a matter of not wanting socially obnoxious voices on the platform, because advertisers don't care for that sort of thing. But it so obviously contributes to the continued dominance of the big platforms that there's no chance they haven't noticed.
- teh_klev 6y agoI think you're completely missing the point.
- worldmerge 6y agoHave you found any web streaming sites that use web rtc? I haven't seen anything since mixer was shutdown, it seems like everything uses RTMP.
- ShamelessC 6y agoAlso looking for something like this. I've considered just setting up my own Jitsi server on the cloud but haven't had a chance yet. Doesn't really work well for streaming to the public either.
- wmeredith 6y agohttps://brightcove.com https://brightcove.com for enterprise
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- TeeMassive 6y agoI hope those alternatives had less neo-nazi stuff :(
- djsumdog 6y agoIf you know how, or are a serious youtuber and have the money to pay for IT people, setup a PeerTube instance. There are scripts that will copy your YouTube or Vimeo library to a PeerTube instance: https://battlepenguin.com/tech/moving-from-youtube-to-peertube/ https://battlepenguin.com/tech/moving-from-youtube-to-peertu...
- athms 6y agoThere isn't a fair use defense to playing cover songs. Moving to an alternative site isn't going to help. This person still needs licenses to distribute even if he is doing covers for free.
- LockAndLol 6y agoQueue the responses of how people don't or won't use it because it's too small, but they will complain YouTube has a monopoly. I don't know what you guys expect to happen if you just keep using YouTube... Do you expect some benevolent spirit to fly down on a fairy chariot and "break up YouTube"? Y'all just want to complain but do nothing else.