Creating an infrastructure that could potentially ingest terrabytes of data per second, and then processing it into multiple resolutions, is a massive ask.
Yeah, but that’s a bad approach.
A website that just hosts links, a torrent to video script, and a like-button that’s a magnetic link is all you need to set up a youtube competitor. The creators can host their own videos, and their fans can help them. Sure there’s a lot of quality of life stuff that integrating a torrent client and browser would help with like automatically using file selection to host only the resolutions you watch up to or automatically deleting videos after a certain time unless you’ve extra likes them, but the underlying system is functional. For steaming, do whatever peertube is doing.
Yes, every time the topic comes up, this same idea comes up of making individuals bear the financial burden of hosting and bandwidth, without an ounce of understanding how that will never, ever, create a viable youtube alternative.
And once those problems come up, someone will have the great idea of gathering people into collectives to lower the prices and increase bargaining power.
Then after that someone will have the idea of reducing costs by moving their individual videos into the same rack, so the costs of hardware, storage, maintenance go down and stability and uptime goes up.
and before long you arrive back at a youtube like platform, and you’ve just become the equivalent of techbro reinventing the concept of a train for the 380th time.
I mean, I’m not in networking so maybe you’re right and I’m totally out of touch with the basics. Downloads don’t even need to be instant. People scroll and save videos to watch later all the time. Maybe I’m ignorant, but it seems like the technology (torrent networks) already exists and this just requires slapping a pretty interface on top of it.
Honestly, it sounds more like a marketing problem than a networking problem.
Yeah, but that’s a bad approach.
A website that just hosts links, a torrent to video script, and a like-button that’s a magnetic link is all you need to set up a youtube competitor. The creators can host their own videos, and their fans can help them. Sure there’s a lot of quality of life stuff that integrating a torrent client and browser would help with like automatically using file selection to host only the resolutions you watch up to or automatically deleting videos after a certain time unless you’ve extra likes them, but the underlying system is functional. For steaming, do whatever peertube is doing.
Yes, every time the topic comes up, this same idea comes up of making individuals bear the financial burden of hosting and bandwidth, without an ounce of understanding how that will never, ever, create a viable youtube alternative.
And once those problems come up, someone will have the great idea of gathering people into collectives to lower the prices and increase bargaining power.
Then after that someone will have the idea of reducing costs by moving their individual videos into the same rack, so the costs of hardware, storage, maintenance go down and stability and uptime goes up.
and before long you arrive back at a youtube like platform, and you’ve just become the equivalent of techbro reinventing the concept of a train for the 380th time.
I mean, I’m not in networking so maybe you’re right and I’m totally out of touch with the basics. Downloads don’t even need to be instant. People scroll and save videos to watch later all the time. Maybe I’m ignorant, but it seems like the technology (torrent networks) already exists and this just requires slapping a pretty interface on top of it.
Honestly, it sounds more like a marketing problem than a networking problem.
Thats not a youtube alternative then. Its a torrent hub 🙄
Integrate all into one app, and it’s close enough functionally that it could compete, and that’s all you really need.