this post was submitted on 04 Nov 2023
102 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37717 readers
465 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://feddit.de/post/5294605

Youtube, for so many years, was just too good. Yes, they changed the 5 star rating system to likes and dislikes and a few years later disabled dislikes altogether, but their algorithm mostly digs up interesting content and it just works for creators and viewers.

This might change soon. Their new strategy to disallow ad-blockers will frustrate a certain kind of viewer. Those who dislike surveillance and like open-source tech, those who use uBlock Origin and know why.

Just like a few years ago mastodon suddenly reached a certain kind of popularity, because twitter had their first big fuckup, maybe Peertube is next. It certainly is the most polished decentralized solution that doesn't use a blockchain. Creators or fans could easily host their own videos, fans can watch it, without ads.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] piper11@feddit.de 15 points 1 year ago (3 children)

It could be done if peertube used a scheme like BitTorrent. We are approaching a time where enough users have sufficient upstream bandwidth for video.

But then, even without hosting costs, creating videos takes much more time and effort than writing a short text.

[–] Butterbee@beehaw.org 11 points 1 year ago

Peertube does allow downloading from peers like bittorrent. But you still need to host the whole video, it only would alleviate data transfer. And I don't think you'd want to not host the video and rely entirely on people sharing your video and continuing to seed it for it to be available. So for running a channel or sharing videos that you have produced you will still need to host the files somewhere.

[–] meldrik@lemmy.wtf 5 points 1 year ago

This is something PeerTube already does. Viewers of a video will be a peer and so can other PeerTube servers also be for each others videos.

Bandwidth isn’t the biggest issue. Storage is. The video need to be stored somewhere and storage is expensive.

We need something like Siacoin, that’s easy to use and easy to donate or sell cheap storage.

[–] aksdb@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Nice idea, but then everytime a video that contains anything licensed by the content mafia is uploaded (even partly), the user in question breaks that license opening themselves up to lawsuits.

In a perfect world where only properly free content is shared that model would work. But that is not how most content shared on YouTube looks like.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

everytime

not a word.

[–] piper11@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

A long time ago I read a paper how to mitigate this. Without remembering the details, the idea was: 1. One peer never holds a complete file, only parts of it. 2. You need a key to find all parts of the file and get them in the right order. So Disney can only accuse you of having an incomplete and unusable part of their movie.

But copyrighted material is only one issue. Do you want your hardware to be used for distributing depictions of sexual abuse, or inciting hatred and violence? Any YouTube replacement will need strong moderation tools.

[–] aksdb@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That is essentially how bittorrent works anyway. In Germany people lost in court over this. Also portions of a copyrighted file are a problem. If they can "proof" that they got a relevant portion (more than the typical fair use seconds) you are still on the hook.

[–] piper11@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

'Landgericht Hamburg' proofing will be hard, admittedly. But doesn't BT just split up a file in x parts, so each part is watchable? What if you sliced differently, like every 100th byte of a file? Or even bitwise slicing? Not one 600 s snippet but 60000 10 ms snippets from throughout the movie.

[–] aksdb@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago

That could help, but if a file is not shared that much (yet) or not many people are online at the moment, a single peer will still share many more parts, likely ending up with having shared significant amounts.

[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But copyrighted material is only one issue. Do you want your hardware to be used for distributing depictions of sexual abuse, or inciting hatred and violence? Any YouTube replacement will need strong moderation tools.

The concept is that will only happen if you have watched that video depicting sexual abuse, because your peertube client (the website) won't download videos you didn't watch.

[–] piper11@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

I was thinking of a hypothetical system were peers provide storage for creators independently of what they are watching (in response to 'videos take too much storage for individuals to host' comment. For peertube, you are right.