Ffs, money really is evil, and more monies are more evil.
Just imagine using your money not in exchange for getting even more money ...
Anything that feeds on itself is bound to be sinister.
Just promote and support loops, ya bastard.
this post was submitted on 18 Jan 2025
225 points (89.2% liked)
Technology
60566 readers
3660 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
There’s a fediverse alternative made by same people who have made pixelfed called Loops Link
Have you used loops? I tried to sign up and its been ~6 hours without a verification email. Its great they have a testflight app on iOS but I've been looking for an android apk with no luck. I really want a federated tik tok to blow up but I'm finding it hard to even get set up.
load more comments
(6 replies)
Loops has some work if it ever wants to really blow up. I crashed constantly while using it the other day, and it's feature set needs work. It has potential though.
Loops is even less federated that Blue Sky, meaning not at all. (It's on the roadmap, though.)
Given the track record of blue sky and pixelfed, I would out my money on pixelfed.
Tho Cuban is asking specifically for ATProto. Guess loops could pivot lol
load more comments
(1 replies)
wtf ever happened to vine?
edit TIL tldr: bought by twitter and killed. founders tried to build a new one in 2020 and died in 2023.
Twitter bought it
load more comments
(1 replies)
Video will not work for AT whatsoever. Text and images, fine, but I'm pretty sure leveraging edge delivery of video is just not going to work out well for users. I think they'll need a centralized host for that portion, or some fancy ways to offload bandwidth otherwise to prevent constant hammering of popular videos.
PeerTube uses WebTorrent technology. Each server hosts a torrent tracker and each web browser viewing a video also shares it. This allows to share the load between the server itself and the clients as well as the bandwidth used through P2P technology.
Yes, and it's incredibly slow and wouldn't scale to millions of users. If one user is high bandwidth, and another low, you'd have uneven distribution of traffic for a newly connecting user, meaning the entirety of whatever you're about to watch won't be completed in time for a good user interaction flow. The issue isn't whether it's technically possible or not, but if it's functional enough for similar traffic as TikTok.
The other issue with torrenting is that a lot of users may incur data charges if the service were to be constantly seeding other users on limited data plans or with data or speed caps in general. It's just not the right tool for the job.
It will scale just fine, so long as the ratio of instances:users is similar.
The current ratio of consumers:creators on youtube is 41:1, by my research. A single server of sufficient power could easily serve thousands of users.
by my research. A single server of sufficient power could easily serve thousands of users.
That's some shitty research you've done then.
1000 users streaming something that's 5mbps would be 5gbps.
5gbps isn't common for consumers... and costs a lot in a datacenter (about 4k/month on the cheaper end).
Buddy, do you not know how periods work? That's 2 different sentences you've mashed together and pretended they were one.
Secondly, I didn't say simultaneously.
I do know how sentences work. I also know that paragraphs and posts sound be related to each other. Your sentences are not completely divorced from each other.
The point was that you're claiming to do research on something just to turn around and say something that WILDLY wrong. This discredits any amount of research you would have done.
Doesn't matter if you say simultaneously or not. You said THOUSANDS... I showed you just 1000. And this was ONLY looking at bandwidth. Not actual server costs.
The point was that you're claiming to do research on something just to turn around and say something that WILDLY wrong
I claimed to do research on something very specific. If you have evidence to the contrary, please feel free to prove me wrong instead of just intentionally misrepresenting my statement.
Doesn't matter if you say simultaneously or not.
...of course it does? A thousand simultaneous streams is not going to have the same load as a dozen...
load more comments
(3 replies)
That's not how this would have to work though. Even with dedicated seeding instances, the instantiation of a session for a torrent is LONG. Like 5s+ long. A request and response from a CDN is in the milliseconds. Users wouldn't use a system that takes 5s just for the initial request for a single video, plus the additional time to sort for segments and recombining before it plays. Even in a fast-ish scenario, that's like 10s alone.
Imagine waiting 10s for a stupid internet video to even start playing to watch some kid dance with a rubber chicken in their pants.
the instantiation of a session for a torrent is LONG. Like 5s+ long
That's weird because it works instantly for me.
Could implement torrents, which I believe is how Peertube handles it.
You apparently do not internet. Anything with a wait time is not an app platform people will use.
more than half of visitors leave a page if they’re forced to wait longer than 3 seconds
and it’s not outlandish to suggest that length decreases every year.
109ms response time was the goal circa 2009. Now, with the advent of Kubernetes, response time as are in seconds. Proxies on top of proxies cost request time. Users will abandon.
some fancy ways to offload bandwidth otherwise to prevent constant hammering of popular videos
it's called a CDN
CDN won't scale to millions of users all uploading videos on a decentralized system. Article is specifically talking about AT Protocol which doesn't account for video. Making a global CDN distribution of videos from decentralized sources is whole other ball of wax.
Bluesky has videos though?
Bluesky has videos linked to a static host by a different site or provider. They are not themselves the host of those videos. Different scenario.
So why does it for for AP with Loops? What’s the fundamental difference between, isn’t the Fediverse the more decentralised system?
Because Activity Pub is not a data salad. A video lives in a specific place.
I don’t think it has been proven that Loops is viable at scale yet.
Can you reform this question?
Loops uses ActivityPub and feeds video in a TikTok like manner.
What's the difference that makes it not achievable for AT but okay for AP?
Long story short Activity Pub only pulls the content it needs from remote servers when it needs it and can choose how to handle media (serve the original or cache and proxy). It already is similar-ish to a CDN.
AT-Proto is super complex, but my understanding is that a new server (app in AT-Proto parlance) needs to copy everything beforehand from all others, and needs to constantly replicate everything, wether it will be served or not, making the data transfers intractably massive.
Because one costs money and another doesn't. Simple fact.
CDN distribution of content is 2X the cost of static hosted files. This isn't a pendant saying "I CAN DO THIS" scenario, it's "can it be monetized", and in the case of of a video service on AT, absolutely not. Who do you think is paying for the hosting costs of a popular video in this scenario?
Cuban doesn't know WTF he's talking about about at all, but if he wants to launch competition and pay for that, there is certainly an expectation that a return will be built. Ads all over the place.