> Since filming, editing, and streaming videos already consumes users' storage and bandwidth resources anyway, the total amount of resources available to a P2P

> Since filming, editing, and streaming videos already consumes users' storage and bandwidth resources anyway, the total amount of resources available to a P2P torrent-style network clearly is already in the ballpark of what's needed for YouTube. I doubt it because a lot of this content doesn't exist outside of Youtube and because the content does exist on external drives has not internet connectivity or capacity to get it. > No idea how well it works in practice, but in theory PeerTube has already solved this using WebTorrent. It seems to currently have 220K users, not exactly what I would call representative or a success for that matter. > The nice thing about P2P is that your network's capacity scales organically with load. More users⇒More capacity. Only if they agree to themselves share the content they host which is not necessarily the case.