4 ms·

Framasoft should run a Peertube-as-a-service and pitch the platform to those who may be Google-averse or have a need to keep content on their own domain name (g

by riffic 4y ago

Framasoft should run a Peertube-as-a-service and pitch the platform to those who may be Google-averse or have a need to keep content on their own domain name (govs, institional orgs, etc). btw I think this is what Eugen, et al, should be doing with Mastodon gGmbH.

nathanaldensr 4y ago
I like the idea. When you say "keep content on their own domain name," do you mean the physical bits are on my servers as the owner of the content, exposed by my custom domain, or do you mean the bits are hosted on PeerTube's servers and merely exposed using my domain? The distinction is important.
- riffic 4y ago
  an example of this in action: I live in Los Angeles. I want the city to archive its city council meetings on a video platform. Preferably, these would be available from a subdomain of lacity.gov instead of being available through youtube or another company of that sort (there are all sorts of namespace issues with today's approach). The example here doesn't need to be limited strictly to council meetings either, the city could host all sorts of video on its own instance of the PeerTube site. I know there's currently a "LACityClerk" channel, but I'm sure you could find other Youtube channels concerning the fire department, LAPD, Department of Transportation, City Library, etc: https://www.youtube.com/c/LACityClerk/videos https://www.youtube.com/c/LACityClerk/videos I (as a constituent) don't really care about the underlying hosting. Framasoft, seeing as how they are intimately familiar with how Peertube works, can sell that underlying hosting. The benefit for the city is they can centralize administration and control over this rather than just give all their content to Google.
  - nathanaldensr 4y ago
    Cool. So if I understand you correctly, you effectively want to decouple hosting (where the bits are) from exposure (how I as a user find and view them).
    - tpxl 4y ago
      I think three models are viable: * Youtube-like website where people post videos * A hosted service on your own domain where they host the videos (like the parent was talking about) * A self hosted version where you host the videos and pay for technical support
    - riffic 4y ago
      I made some edits to my parent comment to further explain my pitch and what the benefit to my hypothetical example city would be if they were to be a Framasoft / Peertube customer.
    - toomuchtodo 4y ago
      The Wordpress equivalent of YouTube, with discovery and federation plug-ins. Anyone can host a Wordpress instance, but you can also pay Automattic to host it for you (your data is also portable and you can move from hosted to self hosted and vice versa).
      - riffic 4y ago
        that should probably be my go-to metaphor here. Automattic seems to be doing okay as a professional WordPress hosting shop. Your clarification about the data being portable is definitely key here.
        toomuchtodo 4y ago
        You might find these resources of value: https://www.ngi.eu/blog/2021/10/05/internet-trust-accessibility-and-archiving-are-made-easier-by-extending-peertube/ https://www.ngi.eu/blog/2021/10/05/internet-trust-accessibil... https://beeldengeluid.github.io/extending-peertube/ https://beeldengeluid.github.io/extending-peertube/
        riffic 4y ago
        really cool! Cities aren't the only ideal client to make this pitch to either, there are all sorts of art collectives, educators, museums, even commercial interests who would probably benefit to move off of YouTube perhaps simply for the privacy and data collection concerns.
Tmpod 4y ago
Yeah, that would be nice, like how Matrix has EMS and such. Mastodon already has plenty of services like that, such as Masto.Host, but none are "official".
max51 4y ago
It would only work while the service is not popular and almost on one uses it. As soon as they attract the attention of copyrights holders, they will be forced to implement the same type of BS we see at youtube. The tech might might be decentralized, but you lose 99% of the benefit of decentralization when you pay a company to host it for you. Whatever good intention they may have, it's all gonna go out the window they the owners are facing a decade behind jail and/or tens of millions of dollars in fines. It's the exact same thing with most platforms that people think will kill youtube. The only reason why they avoided implementing all the crap we hate about youtube is that they are not popular.
- beepbooptheory 4y ago
  Genuinely curious, if nobody at all is making any advertising money from it, and hosting costs are decentralized (even if that concept is fraught in practice), will copyright holders and/or trolls be as aggressive?
  - riffic 4y ago
    perhaps copyright owners could be more willing to share their content if they had a place they could do so from, and could also monetize to their hearts content. this would effectively cut Google out of the rent-seeking loop.
  - Barrin92 4y ago
    Here in Germany torrent users have always been pretty aggressively pursued. The most common way is for copyright holders to upload their own content, collect IPs, sent out mass infringement notices and collect a few hundred bucks per case. There's an actual industry around it. Unless you're in a jurisdiction where that stuff isn't illegal I think the answer is, yes.
    - leobg 4y ago
      True. It’s disgusting. Do you know whether this kind of thing is still being done, now that we have DSGVO?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

by riffic 4y ago

nathanaldensr 4y ago

I like the idea. When you say "keep content on their own domain name," do you mean the physical bits are on my servers as the owner of the content, exposed by my custom domain, or do you mean the bits are hosted on PeerTube's servers and merely exposed using my domain? The distinction is important.

riffic 4y ago
an example of this in action: I live in Los Angeles. I want the city to archive its city council meetings on a video platform. Preferably, these would be available from a subdomain of lacity.gov instead of being available through youtube or another company of that sort (there are all sorts of namespace issues with today's approach). The example here doesn't need to be limited strictly to council meetings either, the city could host all sorts of video on its own instance of the PeerTube site. I know there's currently a "LACityClerk" channel, but I'm sure you could find other Youtube channels concerning the fire department, LAPD, Department of Transportation, City Library, etc: https://www.youtube.com/c/LACityClerk/videos https://www.youtube.com/c/LACityClerk/videos I (as a constituent) don't really care about the underlying hosting. Framasoft, seeing as how they are intimately familiar with how Peertube works, can sell that underlying hosting. The benefit for the city is they can centralize administration and control over this rather than just give all their content to Google.
- nathanaldensr 4y ago
  Cool. So if I understand you correctly, you effectively want to decouple hosting (where the bits are) from exposure (how I as a user find and view them).
  - tpxl 4y ago
    I think three models are viable: * Youtube-like website where people post videos * A hosted service on your own domain where they host the videos (like the parent was talking about) * A self hosted version where you host the videos and pay for technical support
  - riffic 4y ago
    I made some edits to my parent comment to further explain my pitch and what the benefit to my hypothetical example city would be if they were to be a Framasoft / Peertube customer.
  - toomuchtodo 4y ago
    The Wordpress equivalent of YouTube, with discovery and federation plug-ins. Anyone can host a Wordpress instance, but you can also pay Automattic to host it for you (your data is also portable and you can move from hosted to self hosted and vice versa).
    - riffic 4y ago
      that should probably be my go-to metaphor here. Automattic seems to be doing okay as a professional WordPress hosting shop. Your clarification about the data being portable is definitely key here.
      - toomuchtodo 4y ago
        You might find these resources of value: https://www.ngi.eu/blog/2021/10/05/internet-trust-accessibility-and-archiving-are-made-easier-by-extending-peertube/ https://www.ngi.eu/blog/2021/10/05/internet-trust-accessibil... https://beeldengeluid.github.io/extending-peertube/ https://beeldengeluid.github.io/extending-peertube/
        riffic 4y ago
        really cool! Cities aren't the only ideal client to make this pitch to either, there are all sorts of art collectives, educators, museums, even commercial interests who would probably benefit to move off of YouTube perhaps simply for the privacy and data collection concerns.

Tmpod 4y ago

Yeah, that would be nice, like how Matrix has EMS and such. Mastodon already has plenty of services like that, such as Masto.Host, but none are "official".

max51 4y ago

It would only work while the service is not popular and almost on one uses it. As soon as they attract the attention of copyrights holders, they will be forced to implement the same type of BS we see at youtube. The tech might might be decentralized, but you lose 99% of the benefit of decentralization when you pay a company to host it for you. Whatever good intention they may have, it's all gonna go out the window they the owners are facing a decade behind jail and/or tens of millions of dollars in fines. It's the exact same thing with most platforms that people think will kill youtube. The only reason why they avoided implementing all the crap we hate about youtube is that they are not popular.

beepbooptheory 4y ago
Genuinely curious, if nobody at all is making any advertising money from it, and hosting costs are decentralized (even if that concept is fraught in practice), will copyright holders and/or trolls be as aggressive?
- riffic 4y ago
  perhaps copyright owners could be more willing to share their content if they had a place they could do so from, and could also monetize to their hearts content. this would effectively cut Google out of the rent-seeking loop.
- Barrin92 4y ago
  Here in Germany torrent users have always been pretty aggressively pursued. The most common way is for copyright holders to upload their own content, collect IPs, sent out mass infringement notices and collect a few hundred bucks per case. There's an actual industry around it. Unless you're in a jurisdiction where that stuff isn't illegal I think the answer is, yes.
  - leobg 4y ago
    True. It’s disgusting. Do you know whether this kind of thing is still being done, now that we have DSGVO?

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]