5 ms·

We need more alt-tech companies competing against youtube and the like. They have too much power to silence people.

by Racing0461 3y ago

philipov 3y ago
Nebula is trying to compete, they seem like a good alternative to support.
- Kye 3y ago
  Nebula isn't really a competitor. It's more of a life raft for a select few YouTubers. A competitor would let people outside a group of already successful channels upload stuff.
  - lmm 3y ago
    A competitor has got to be a sustainable business first. Opening the floodgates to host everyone's videos can be a very quick way to burn all your money.
    - kelnos 3y ago
      Not to mention their moderation burden is way down if they only accept people who are known quantities and are unlikely to get them in trouble by posting copyrighted material or other problematic things.
    - Kye 3y ago
      To be clear: I think it's fine to be exclusive. A bunch of YouTubers got together to make a backup in case YouTube did what YouTube often does. If they ever open it, I'll call it a competitor. Right now, it just isn't unless you have some unconventional definition of competitor. They're trying to survive YouTube, not beat it or even operate in the same space. Nebula is currently a backup for a (large) niche of YouTube.
      - LargeTomato 3y ago
        Do you think Tik Tok is a YouTube competitor? Netflix? You can compete with YouTube without cloning YouTube.
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
  - LargeTomato 3y ago
    > A competitor would let people outside a group of already successful channels upload stuff. Why compete with YouTube on YouTube's terms? You cannot beat on e.g. storage costs. There may be a market niche for a smaller, more cost-efficient platform that pays established creators a bigger fit than YouTube can.
- Racing0461 3y ago
  nebula is like one youtube channel being hosted off a server. a more comparable example would be rumble that pretty much has each major feature of youtube on its own.
TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
I think it will come eventually. Bandwidth is getting cheaper (at least I think it is) and video compression is getting better all the time (saving on storage and bandwidth), both lowering the cost of operating such a service. This is why I feel YouTube’s crusade against ad blockers is short sighted. Sure they can get away with it now but it might cost them in the future against potential competition. Even viewers who don’t watch ads might add value to your platform’s content in the form of comments and votes. Energy would be better used trying to find out why viewers hate their ads so much and if there is a way to remedy it and get some kind of compensation.
- janosdebugs 3y ago
  > Bandwidth is getting cheaper 4k video would like a word.
  - wmf 3y ago
    The cost of streaming 4K now is probably lower than the cost of streaming SD when YouTube started.
    - janosdebugs 3y ago
      That may be so, but it's still stupidly expensive and the free investor money seems to have dried up. Not to mention that you'd be competing with an incumbent, which investors don't like unless you have a very clear and hard to replicate edge.
janosdebugs 3y ago
There have been plenty of attempts. The problem is the high barrier to entry. Hosting videos costs a lot and you need a lot of content to keep viewers engaged/paying. If you go the advertizing route, companies don't really want to invest time and money into a platform that doesn't have a wide enough userbase. The only reason why YouTube worked like this is the silly amount of money Google was willing to sink into it. There is something to be said about more specialized sites like Nebula, but I, for example, canceled my subscription there because the focus was too narrow.
- rickydroll 3y ago
  maybe time to build a YTclone on top of IPFS?
  - janosdebugs 3y ago
    How would that work for the average user?
    - wmf 3y ago
      I don't think users would notice but the IPFS network might collapse.
      - janosdebugs 3y ago
        I think they would if the mobile phone app started uploading a bunch of content and eat into bandwidth and battery. If the app doesn't upload, we still have a centralized system with a very inefficient transport layer. Besides, even if you work around that problem somehow, YouTube has an insane amount of videos with very few views. That means there are not enough people to upload content, the centralized server or the original uploader needs to keep hosting them.
      - rickydroll 3y ago
        if it did collapse from a YT clone, IPFS was not set up to handle what we really need it for, firehose science data sources.

We need more alt-tech companies competing against youtube and the like. They have too much power to silence people.

philipov 3y ago

Nebula is trying to compete, they seem like a good alternative to support.

Kye 3y ago
Nebula isn't really a competitor. It's more of a life raft for a select few YouTubers. A competitor would let people outside a group of already successful channels upload stuff.
- lmm 3y ago
  A competitor has got to be a sustainable business first. Opening the floodgates to host everyone's videos can be a very quick way to burn all your money.
  - kelnos 3y ago
    Not to mention their moderation burden is way down if they only accept people who are known quantities and are unlikely to get them in trouble by posting copyrighted material or other problematic things.
  - Kye 3y ago
    To be clear: I think it's fine to be exclusive. A bunch of YouTubers got together to make a backup in case YouTube did what YouTube often does. If they ever open it, I'll call it a competitor. Right now, it just isn't unless you have some unconventional definition of competitor. They're trying to survive YouTube, not beat it or even operate in the same space. Nebula is currently a backup for a (large) niche of YouTube.
    - LargeTomato 3y ago
      Do you think Tik Tok is a YouTube competitor? Netflix? You can compete with YouTube without cloning YouTube.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
- LargeTomato 3y ago
  > A competitor would let people outside a group of already successful channels upload stuff. Why compete with YouTube on YouTube's terms? You cannot beat on e.g. storage costs. There may be a market niche for a smaller, more cost-efficient platform that pays established creators a bigger fit than YouTube can.
Racing0461 3y ago
nebula is like one youtube channel being hosted off a server. a more comparable example would be rumble that pretty much has each major feature of youtube on its own.

TerrifiedMouse 3y ago

I think it will come eventually. Bandwidth is getting cheaper (at least I think it is) and video compression is getting better all the time (saving on storage and bandwidth), both lowering the cost of operating such a service. This is why I feel YouTube’s crusade against ad blockers is short sighted. Sure they can get away with it now but it might cost them in the future against potential competition. Even viewers who don’t watch ads might add value to your platform’s content in the form of comments and votes. Energy would be better used trying to find out why viewers hate their ads so much and if there is a way to remedy it and get some kind of compensation.

janosdebugs 3y ago
> Bandwidth is getting cheaper 4k video would like a word.
- wmf 3y ago
  The cost of streaming 4K now is probably lower than the cost of streaming SD when YouTube started.
  - janosdebugs 3y ago
    That may be so, but it's still stupidly expensive and the free investor money seems to have dried up. Not to mention that you'd be competing with an incumbent, which investors don't like unless you have a very clear and hard to replicate edge.

janosdebugs 3y ago

There have been plenty of attempts. The problem is the high barrier to entry. Hosting videos costs a lot and you need a lot of content to keep viewers engaged/paying. If you go the advertizing route, companies don't really want to invest time and money into a platform that doesn't have a wide enough userbase. The only reason why YouTube worked like this is the silly amount of money Google was willing to sink into it. There is something to be said about more specialized sites like Nebula, but I, for example, canceled my subscription there because the focus was too narrow.

rickydroll 3y ago
maybe time to build a YTclone on top of IPFS?
- janosdebugs 3y ago
  How would that work for the average user?
  - wmf 3y ago
    I don't think users would notice but the IPFS network might collapse.
    - janosdebugs 3y ago
      I think they would if the mobile phone app started uploading a bunch of content and eat into bandwidth and battery. If the app doesn't upload, we still have a centralized system with a very inefficient transport layer. Besides, even if you work around that problem somehow, YouTube has an insane amount of videos with very few views. That means there are not enough people to upload content, the centralized server or the original uploader needs to keep hosting them.
    - rickydroll 3y ago
      if it did collapse from a YT clone, IPFS was not set up to handle what we really need it for, firehose science data sources.