4 ms·

It’s true that YouTube is a private entity and should be able to do whatever is in its profit maximizing interest. But, the issue that people are starting to r

It’s true that YouTube is a private entity and should be able to do whatever is in its profit maximizing interest. But, the issue that people are starting to react to is - are some platforms a natural monopoly? Is it useful to have all user-generated public video clips be aggregated by one central provider? The answer seems like it’s yes. If there’s only gonna be one platform, or it’s socially optimal to have one platform - is it right to give control of that to one entity into perpetuity? That a political question.

mulmen 5y ago
> But, the issue that people are starting to react to is - are some platforms a natural monopoly? No. > Is it useful to have all user-generated public video clips be aggregated by one central provider? The answer seems like it’s yes. The answer is no. Vimeo exists. Facebook and Twitter both feature user-generated video content. I hear TikTok is a thing. In addition to these platforms basically anyone can self-host in 2022. Plenty of news outlets self-host. > If there’s only gonna be one platform, or it’s socially optimal to have one platform - is it right to give control of that to one entity into perpetuity? You have not made the case that there should be only one platform so the second part of your statement is irrelevant. > That a political question. Only for people who want to say things without suffering the consequences.
- bduerst 5y ago
  Yep, popular != monopoly, especially given the number of easily accessible alternatives. Given the state of cloud computing in 2022, there has never been a time that it has been easier to host your own video streaming, so it's not a natural monopoly either.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- jankyxenon 5y ago
  The answer is not yes or no. The answer is whatever a large enough portion of the electorate believe. I’m not making a case for anything - I’m explaining the narrative behind a growing POV. But I will say that YouTube is different than Facebook videos or TikTok. YouTube is meant to be a searchable video index across topics and time. It’s a video search engine and hosting service in one.
  - mulmen 5y ago
    Natural Monopoly is a technical term. If the electorate wants to change the constitution we can do that with no justification. It only has to pass Congress and be ratified by the states.

mulmen 5y ago

> But, the issue that people are starting to react to is - are some platforms a natural monopoly? No. > Is it useful to have all user-generated public video clips be aggregated by one central provider? The answer seems like it’s yes. The answer is no. Vimeo exists. Facebook and Twitter both feature user-generated video content. I hear TikTok is a thing. In addition to these platforms basically anyone can self-host in 2022. Plenty of news outlets self-host. > If there’s only gonna be one platform, or it’s socially optimal to have one platform - is it right to give control of that to one entity into perpetuity? You have not made the case that there should be only one platform so the second part of your statement is irrelevant. > That a political question. Only for people who want to say things without suffering the consequences.

bduerst 5y ago
Yep, popular != monopoly, especially given the number of easily accessible alternatives. Given the state of cloud computing in 2022, there has never been a time that it has been easier to host your own video streaming, so it's not a natural monopoly either.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
jankyxenon 5y ago
The answer is not yes or no. The answer is whatever a large enough portion of the electorate believe. I’m not making a case for anything - I’m explaining the narrative behind a growing POV. But I will say that YouTube is different than Facebook videos or TikTok. YouTube is meant to be a searchable video index across topics and time. It’s a video search engine and hosting service in one.
- mulmen 5y ago
  Natural Monopoly is a technical term. If the electorate wants to change the constitution we can do that with no justification. It only has to pass Congress and be ratified by the states.