Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics.
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
Fun fact, video files are extremely big and cost money to host. It's a neat idea but will never be scalable in the same way that YouTube is without some form of monetization
Funnily enough, I think federation is the only way anything is going to compete with YouTube. If the hosting costs are distributed across the network, it gets a bit more viable.
I could imagine a niche hobby focused instance funded by a patreon that hosts the videos of a few related creators. Perhaps the videos contain sponsorships which the hosting instance gets a cut of.
It would be even better if there was a BitTorrent style P2P sharing from others who have recently watched a video sharing it to other users. A bit tough from a browser, so perhaps in order to watch videos you need to sign up with (or simply just access via) a "viewer" instance that acts as a content cache and seed for other viewer instances.
Viewer instances could fund themselves through the usual selection of options, and keep a cap on costs by limiting users. I could imagine a lot of people might self host viewer instances
You're so right IMO!
I'm trying with a Lemmy art instance (we'll see how that goes eh), and I host that on a PC, why couldn't I have a bunch of art videos too? I think I can :-)
Of course, those "monetising" youtubers who "has to" "reach out" to millions of subscribers would need something else, but they won't be missed by me anyway...
peertube already has the bittorrent thing, just not many people watch at the same time. it needs to be easier to seed videos you watch/like without leaving the browser window open
That was my thinking behind the viewer instances that do the seeding once the user has gone away from the browser. It also simplifies the client apps as they don't have to try and set up p2p connections in random environments (imagine someone watching something on their phone via public WiFi)
You - or someone like you - should totally make this happen.
I'm sorry but you're completely out to lunch, YouTube is barely sustainable as it is and that's without the inefficiency of distributed storage. There's no way you can convince people to give up half their phone storage just to watch internet videos when ad-supported alternatives exist
why peer to peer wouldn't be scalable for this?
For not popular Videos you could have the same system as private trackers to encourage people to seed those videos.
peertube uses torrents
Yes, and torrents only work because they are relatively unpopular. You reach a certain scale and proportion of people who would rather just freeloader rather than seed gets too big
i don't think you understand how the torrenting works or why i raised it as a solution to the storage/bandwidth problem.
I do understand how torrenting works, it only works because the total amount of upload bandwidth being made available is enough to sustain the demand for download bandwidth. As you get to larger and larger groups of users, the proportion of people willing to seed drops. Also keep in mind that most ISPs give their users extremely low upload bandwidth relative to their download pipe and you have an unscalable solution, at least if you're talking anywhere within a few orders of magnitude of what YouTube handles.
peertube has everyone currently watching a video join the swarm. you just don't seem to understand why we keep raising peertube and torrenting in the same sentence
Everyone currently watching the video will not have enough total upload bandwidth to support the download demand, especially when you move to resolutions higher than 1080
do you have a graph I can look at?
Happy?
no. this doesn't seem to be actual data.
You asked for a graph and I gave you a graph. If you can't be bothered to research the disparity in residential upload vs download speeds for yourself, that's on you.
your bad attitude is very convincing.