I feel like it would be best to proxy YouTube, or subscribe to paid indie channels like nebula, but without a user base and without ad revenue or subscription revenue I don’t know how quality content can come to PeerTube. Maybe I’m just missing the content but when I’ve checked it’s all very low quality, just random unedited webcam vblogs mostly.

  • misk@sopuli.xyzEnglish
    3·
    2 days ago

    In all honesty I don’t understand how PeerTube is supposed to scale with users once it gets content. Hosting, transcoding and streaming video is super expensive. There’s also a matter of making money from videos and without financial incentive it’ll be hard to compete with commercial solutions (in a capitalist hellholes that most of us live in). Community funding can keep up with hosting text but can barely keep up with hosting pictures, let alone something more, unless you’re an internet archive or something.

    People who are on Nebula already made it in Youtube and they’re so big that they just want to make more money. They provide nice service for the money but I don’t think they will come support your revolution for free.

    • P03 Locke@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      2·
      2 days ago

      People who are on Nebula already made it in Youtube and they’re so big that they just want to make more money.

      Nebula is a gated community for YouTubers who have already made it. In fact, they are basically subsidized by YouTube, as that is the place for new content creators to grow, and they only allow creators that have gotten high enough on the YouTube hierarchy to get their attention.

      Really, they have no avenue for adding more users, like the wealth of good indie YouTubers that are up and coming, and they don’t even seem to want to add to their own curated list themselves. Their community has been stagnated for years. All they have done is forced their current membership to constantly advertise for them on YouTube.

      Nebula is not the answer and never will be. I don’t even see a point in going there, because I already have these same channels on YouTube.

    • Meldrik@lemmy.wtfEnglish
      1·
      2 days ago

      PeerTube scales by increasing the amount of instances available. But you are pretty much correct. The two things that’s expensive is: Storage and transcoding. The biggest expense is storage. It gets more and more expensive as videos is uploaded. Transcoding can become more expensive, if you have to keep up with new videos getting added all the time.

      I would like to see individual content creators create their own PeerTube servers and thereby serving their content to the rest of the PeerTube servers and the Fediverse. I imagine a lot of content creators keep some kind of backup of their videos, so why not attach a PeerTube server to it? PeerTube allows you to keep the original file.

      Regarding financial incentive, the “only” thing creators would miss out on, on Peertube is ad revenue. If we disregard the low amount of viewers on PeerTube compared to YouTube, a creator can still use sponsors, patreon, donations, affiliate links etc. on their videos.

    • aeshna_cyanea@lemm.eeEnglish
      0·
      2 days ago

      Peertube allegedly uses p2p networking that runs in your browser to serve videos. It’s open source but when I tried to actually read up on the protocol large parts of the docs were in french

      • Meldrik@lemmy.wtfEnglish
        2·
        2 days ago

        It uses P2P when multiple users is watching the same video. A PeerTube server can also mirror another PeerTube server’s videos and function as a peer.

        You can see it this screenshot, that I’ve downloaded most of the video data from other peers.

        PeerTube is build on ActivityPub, just like Lemmy. Right now federation is broken between Lemmy and PeerTube. When it’s fixed, you’ll be able to subscribe to PeerTube channels from here and comment as well.