5 ms·

> YouTube (and other mainstream providers) solves user stories. The user story is "I want to find and watch interesting videos" and they nail it. You miss anot

> YouTube (and other mainstream providers) solves user stories. The user story is "I want to find and watch interesting videos" and they nail it. You miss another user story: IT department wants to self host a video distribution platform on their intranet and users need to embed video in intranet CMS (blogs, wikis, kb, etc.) and they will watch those videos at home, at the office and in between places. Thinking audience and monetization, is basically thinking "youtube clone", and that narrows outlooks on what peertube brings to the table. > The user story for this, judging by their homepage (https://joinpeertube.org https://joinpeertube.org), seems to be "I want a boring lecture on how bad Big Tech is"? Just pick a different paragraph then: What is PeerTube? PeerTube allows you to create your own video platform, in complete independence.

ploum 3y ago
At some point, someone literate enough to understand how bad Big Tech is but still promoting Big Tech should be face it. It is like smoking. People say "I know that smoking kill, I don’t want to be reminded all the time". Well, as long as you are polluting and killing innocents by smoking in their vicinity, you are the asshole. You don’t seem to understand so people keep telling you (and, guess what, in the case of Peertube, they even tell you in a friendly way with cute mascots.)
- DeIlliad 3y ago
  Comparing using Youtube to smoking is why I can never take these conversations seriously.
  - rakoo 3y ago
    And yet the comparison is apt. Both provide ephemeral positive signals to the brain at a cost that is detrimental to individuals' or society's health (not even talking about environment, which is a part of society's health).
- BobaFloutist 3y ago
  "I want to find something to do other than smoking. I find I smoke the most when I"m bored." "Have you considered attending this lecture about the dangers of smoking?"
jpc0 3y ago
> You miss another user story: IT department wants to self host a video distribution platform on their intranet and users need to embed video in intranet CMS (blogs, wikis, kb, etc.) and they will watch those videos at home, at the office and in between places. It's not missed, that story doesn't exist. In any place where IT can even think about self hosting video they likely control the user's entire tech stack and don't need a super flexible player, they can just use a video tag... On the other hand a company like this is more likely to use a SaaS product because they would have done a cost benefit analysis and figured spinning up a server and allocating bandwidth which could include significant network stack upgrades would cost far too much money to self host video. Also it's free to stick the video on YouTube as an unisted video and embed the player... There is also other platforms that can be paid for the exact same service...
- austin-cheney 3y ago
  I get so tired of hearing about tech stacks. Tech stack discussions are 90% developers spinning their wheels and 10% money. Its really closer to 80/20, but most developers cannot get out of their own heads enough to reach a 20% discussion about money and business expenses.
  - FalconSensei 3y ago
    In the current scenario with companies cost-cutting, I would say money is 30% or 40%.
  - jpc0 3y ago
    In this instance tech stack has nothing to do with developers but rather what software and hardware is deployed to end users. An example: HP ProBook + Win 11 + Microsoft 365 each allocated x amount of bandwidth allowed to burst to Y amount It can get significantly more in depth than that and it's 90% cost driven unlike choosing which DB you will be using as a developer...
- johnchristopher 3y ago
  > > You miss another user story: IT department wants to self host a video distribution platform on their intranet and users need to embed video in intranet CMS (blogs, wikis, kb, etc.) and they will watch those videos at home, at the office and in between places. > It's not missed, that story doesn't exist. Sure it does. We have been discussing it for weeks with colleagues and bed testing it. Next step is to consider using v5 or v6. > In any place where IT can even think about self hosting video they likely control the user's entire tech stack and don't need a super flexible player, they can just use a video tag... I had written a longer comment but if you equate slapping an mp4 URL in a video tag with what peertube brings then I frankly don't see the point. Not sure what controlling the user's entire tech stack even means then. > On the other hand a company like this is more likely to use a SaaS product because they would have done a cost benefit analysis and figured spinning up a server and allocating bandwidth which could include significant network stack upgrades would cost far too much money to self host video. Pretty sure peertube and its variable bitrate and resolution will use less bandwidth than a user's original mp4 file in a video tag would but okay. edit: > Also it's free to stick the video on YouTube as an unisted video and embed the player... Yeah, right. What can go wrong uh...

ploum 3y ago

At some point, someone literate enough to understand how bad Big Tech is but still promoting Big Tech should be face it. It is like smoking. People say "I know that smoking kill, I don’t want to be reminded all the time". Well, as long as you are polluting and killing innocents by smoking in their vicinity, you are the asshole. You don’t seem to understand so people keep telling you (and, guess what, in the case of Peertube, they even tell you in a friendly way with cute mascots.)

DeIlliad 3y ago
Comparing using Youtube to smoking is why I can never take these conversations seriously.
- rakoo 3y ago
  And yet the comparison is apt. Both provide ephemeral positive signals to the brain at a cost that is detrimental to individuals' or society's health (not even talking about environment, which is a part of society's health).
BobaFloutist 3y ago
"I want to find something to do other than smoking. I find I smoke the most when I"m bored." "Have you considered attending this lecture about the dangers of smoking?"

jpc0 3y ago

> You miss another user story: IT department wants to self host a video distribution platform on their intranet and users need to embed video in intranet CMS (blogs, wikis, kb, etc.) and they will watch those videos at home, at the office and in between places. It's not missed, that story doesn't exist. In any place where IT can even think about self hosting video they likely control the user's entire tech stack and don't need a super flexible player, they can just use a video tag... On the other hand a company like this is more likely to use a SaaS product because they would have done a cost benefit analysis and figured spinning up a server and allocating bandwidth which could include significant network stack upgrades would cost far too much money to self host video. Also it's free to stick the video on YouTube as an unisted video and embed the player... There is also other platforms that can be paid for the exact same service...

austin-cheney 3y ago
I get so tired of hearing about tech stacks. Tech stack discussions are 90% developers spinning their wheels and 10% money. Its really closer to 80/20, but most developers cannot get out of their own heads enough to reach a 20% discussion about money and business expenses.
- FalconSensei 3y ago
  In the current scenario with companies cost-cutting, I would say money is 30% or 40%.
- jpc0 3y ago
  In this instance tech stack has nothing to do with developers but rather what software and hardware is deployed to end users. An example: HP ProBook + Win 11 + Microsoft 365 each allocated x amount of bandwidth allowed to burst to Y amount It can get significantly more in depth than that and it's 90% cost driven unlike choosing which DB you will be using as a developer...
johnchristopher 3y ago
> > You miss another user story: IT department wants to self host a video distribution platform on their intranet and users need to embed video in intranet CMS (blogs, wikis, kb, etc.) and they will watch those videos at home, at the office and in between places. > It's not missed, that story doesn't exist. Sure it does. We have been discussing it for weeks with colleagues and bed testing it. Next step is to consider using v5 or v6. > In any place where IT can even think about self hosting video they likely control the user's entire tech stack and don't need a super flexible player, they can just use a video tag... I had written a longer comment but if you equate slapping an mp4 URL in a video tag with what peertube brings then I frankly don't see the point. Not sure what controlling the user's entire tech stack even means then. > On the other hand a company like this is more likely to use a SaaS product because they would have done a cost benefit analysis and figured spinning up a server and allocating bandwidth which could include significant network stack upgrades would cost far too much money to self host video. Pretty sure peertube and its variable bitrate and resolution will use less bandwidth than a user's original mp4 file in a video tag would but okay. edit: > Also it's free to stick the video on YouTube as an unisted video and embed the player... Yeah, right. What can go wrong uh...