I was always an Android but broke down after the thousandth idiot friend told me I wouldn’t have problems if tried iPhone. Let’s be honest though. Android folks don’t have privacy or are tech savvy either. It’s the ones using graphineOS and the other stripped down android OSs that do

Two issues:

1. Most people have asymmetric connections, can download faster than upload.

2. It’s cheaper to provide bandwidth to a datacenter connected to the backbone than it is to someone’s house.

Like, from a purely-financial standpoint, if one wants to pay for access with bandwidth and storage, it’d make more sense to have a structure where people somehow contribute to running PeerTube instances in datacenters, as you get more bang for your buck.

It’s been tried, somewhat.

BitTorrent uses tit-for-tat high-priority bandwidth resource provision. Some BitTorrent trackers have (or had; I haven’t looked recently) a longer-lived, albeit crude, credit system for maintaining ratios.

Mojo Nation, which is what Bram Cohen did before BitTorrent, had a longer-lived credit-tracking system.

But the larger problem there is that they were basically exploiting a quirk in ISP billing. ISPs normally have flat-rate billing – you can use as much bandwidth as you want, and only pay a flat rate. ISPs just average out costs across users. Light users subsidize heavier users. But…that creates a misincentive for people to figure out how to monetize, even if it’s very inefficient, their bandwidth, and saturate it constantly, which basically makes light users pay for things above-and-beyond the heavy users’ regular bandwidth. It’s economically inefficient, leans on the fact that the billing system has that subsidy built into it. Like, it’s not the system that you’d want if everyone were doing it, as you’d want to have content in datacenters, one way or another.

I do kind of wonder how practical it would be for it to be the norm for people to have some kind of VPS of their own. That’d let them do some things that aren’t really economical or practical today, and provide some more-privacy-friendly options for one person to provide services (well, privacy-friendly as long as you trust your VPS provider).

Well here we are sharing textual communication on fedi.

Text takes less storage space and bandwidth then videos.

It might be possible to compete in an area where YouTube (presently) has content restrictions. I assume that YouTube doesn’t allow outright porn, and that that’s how PornTube and friends can exist.

Dangerous business to enter, though, because if one day YouTube decides to enter the market (or decides to create a differently-branded service that shares infrastructure) that does do porn, I assume that that’s gonna put those smaller competitors in danger of getting wiped out. An investor in such a venture is at risk of losing their investment then.

I know.

I mean, there’s about 3 to 4 depending on your interpretation.

And no, I don’t appreciate the cursed knowledge of sexual puns on my part, but you know, furries, am I right?

Unfortunately, the free, decentralized nature of PeerTube actually makes it more difficult to be a legitimate YouTube successor. The main reason: monetization. Most of the big creators people watch on YouTube don’t just do their videos as a hobby, it’s a job where they make their living. Some of the biggest will make enough in stream donations or Patron pledges to not have to worry about ads or sponsorships, but there’s a huge “middle class” of content creators, you could call it, who live video ad check to video ad check with Patreon or stream donations being supplemental to the ad revenue. Drop that ad money, and those creators will have to either figure out how to quickly multiply their income from other sources or there would be an extremely sharp drop in both quantity and quality of videos. Expect a ton of much-beloved channels to die in the process. To be any sort of competitor at all while retaining its free, decentralized nature, you would need to have many, many times more instances than exist now, with a large percentage of them run by entities with enough resources to pay for both server costs of hosting and distributing large amounts of content and the cost to pay and support the creators on those instances who previously lived mainly on ad revenue or who want to monetize themselves on the platform. Centralized platforms for video take away many of these issues, or make them a ton easier to handle. They allow for easily setting up a subscription based service such as Nebula that the creators know they will be able to at least count on being steady. It may or may not be a lot, but it’s something guaranteed without the creators themselves also having to worry about paying out in server costs, which is still more in income than PeerTube can offer. What would a creator prefer, some guaranteed income with only their video production costs as overhead, or no guarantee of income while bearing both production and hosting costs?

EDIT: updated “FreeTube” to “PeerTube”. I absolutely recommend FreeTube, great YouTube client. PeerTube has some potential, but it will never properly compete with YouTube for the reasons I list above. In one word, money.

removed by mod