#Pixelfed just overtook #Lemmy as the 4th most used #Fediverse software. Here’s the raw numbers in terms of total users:Pixelfed: 474,151Lemmy: 470,716Pixelfed is moving close towards overtaking #P...
I can’t wait for peertube to take off. I think of all of the social medias, youtube has the most enduring monopoly, because hosting is such a huge barrier it’s got even more of a natural monopoly than regular social media.
I think once peertube can start ascending that might be the ballgame for decentralised social media in general.
Exactly!! YouTube is by far the best “social” platform (or least shit) and sadly the strongest monopoly. Cus what the fuck is a newly made competitor gonna do? Rip all YouTube videos and host them? People on IG and X etc don’t really go around looking at old posts, those places are more for looking at what’s new and such. On YouTube however its entirely game that u find a dope edutainment video from years ago that you happen to vibe with.
That is very true, and I think some kind of archive is going to be important eventually. I think to get around the hosting costs, one method could be for peertube instances to form a union of instances for collective purchases, because the cost goes down with scale.
With a large enough group you could even split hosting among different providers to prevent a monopoly from forming in the hosting space.
I think a big part of that is just straight up storage space, more specially a lack thereof. Google won’t release specifics but estimates put the total data stored by YouTube at somewhere near an exabyte (1 million terrabytes). Most of which is made up by video files.
Of course that’s just issue number 1 of many to figure out.
It’s a matter of finding where the line between cost and user satisfaction meet.
Like sure you could limit all videos to 60fps @ 720p or 30fps @ 1080p but most everyone now wants everything 120fps @ 2160p which takes up dozens of gigs per video and eats up bandwidth.
Honestly youtube barely has it currently. The vast majority of creators make very little on the platform and rely largely on supporter donations, merch and sponsorships, which could work on any platform.
By squeezing creators out of every penny they can, youtube has forced people to find other options abd made themselves less and less relevant. I guess that’s enshittification for you.
You can also gate access to certain videos on peertube, so a nebula-like model might also work eventually.
I’m genuinely confused. Is YouTube even profitable ATP? Hard to imagine it not being so but they’ve been doubling down on squeezing out every coin they can, trying to fight adblock is one example, pushing out more ads too. Wtf even is going on over there.
Different metrics on profitability. Are you judging their hosting costs on how much it actually costs Google to add more in their already existing data centers for YouTube like a good vertically integrated monopoly or are you judging their hosting costs on how much their google cloud bill would be. You’ll get wildly different numbers depending on the method.
I don’t know that they’ve ever been profitable. They might be a loss-leader in some way, feeding into google’s ad ecosystem somehow, or maybe it was always just theoretically profitable in the future in some ill-defined way that allowed the money to keep flowing. Who knows.
All I know is, if they follow the pattern the rest of them have, they aren’t going to be sustainable long-term.
I can’t wait for peertube to take off. I think of all of the social medias, youtube has the most enduring monopoly, because hosting is such a huge barrier it’s got even more of a natural monopoly than regular social media.
I think once peertube can start ascending that might be the ballgame for decentralised social media in general.
Exactly!! YouTube is by far the best “social” platform (or least shit) and sadly the strongest monopoly. Cus what the fuck is a newly made competitor gonna do? Rip all YouTube videos and host them? People on IG and X etc don’t really go around looking at old posts, those places are more for looking at what’s new and such. On YouTube however its entirely game that u find a dope edutainment video from years ago that you happen to vibe with.
That is very true, and I think some kind of archive is going to be important eventually. I think to get around the hosting costs, one method could be for peertube instances to form a union of instances for collective purchases, because the cost goes down with scale.
With a large enough group you could even split hosting among different providers to prevent a monopoly from forming in the hosting space.
I think a big part of that is just straight up storage space, more specially a lack thereof. Google won’t release specifics but estimates put the total data stored by YouTube at somewhere near an exabyte (1 million terrabytes). Most of which is made up by video files.
Of course that’s just issue number 1 of many to figure out.
Storage costs keeps getting cheaper, but high quality video keeps taking up more space.
It’s a matter of finding where the line between cost and user satisfaction meet.
Like sure you could limit all videos to 60fps @ 720p or 30fps @ 1080p but most everyone now wants everything 120fps @ 2160p which takes up dozens of gigs per video and eats up bandwidth.
Does peertube have monetization for creator’s? Because that’s how you get content that most people watch.
Honestly youtube barely has it currently. The vast majority of creators make very little on the platform and rely largely on supporter donations, merch and sponsorships, which could work on any platform.
By squeezing creators out of every penny they can, youtube has forced people to find other options abd made themselves less and less relevant. I guess that’s enshittification for you.
You can also gate access to certain videos on peertube, so a nebula-like model might also work eventually.
I’m genuinely confused. Is YouTube even profitable ATP? Hard to imagine it not being so but they’ve been doubling down on squeezing out every coin they can, trying to fight adblock is one example, pushing out more ads too. Wtf even is going on over there.
Different metrics on profitability. Are you judging their hosting costs on how much it actually costs Google to add more in their already existing data centers for YouTube like a good vertically integrated monopoly or are you judging their hosting costs on how much their google cloud bill would be. You’ll get wildly different numbers depending on the method.
I don’t know that they’ve ever been profitable. They might be a loss-leader in some way, feeding into google’s ad ecosystem somehow, or maybe it was always just theoretically profitable in the future in some ill-defined way that allowed the money to keep flowing. Who knows.
All I know is, if they follow the pattern the rest of them have, they aren’t going to be sustainable long-term.