If rolled out widely, this would make web browsers and third-party YouTube clients without a DRM license unusable for YouTube playback, download, etc. This would include almost all open-source web browsers and almost all third-party YouTube clients. Archive link to reddit post about this
This is fine. I actually encourage this. Let the market decide whether it likes this.
The issue is that hosting costs for videos are insane. There’s nowhere else to turn except for Youtube (unfortunately PeerTube is so far off being a reasonable alternative). I would love to see some more competition, but I don’t see it happening in the close future. The sad state of things is that 90% of the population won’t care if their favorite MrBeast video has DRM.
It isn’t an issue. I mean it is a completely artificial issue that was created by YouTube itself. What do I mean? That only ~0.01% of those videos should really be videos. All other things could easily be in a text form. Storing text is cheap. Searching text is convenient. Reading text is easier.
Agreed!!
Why? Because of the hosting cost? Where is Youtube getting this for cheap?
I mean, I could see PeerTube being an alternative if there was better discoverability, better tools for creators to monetize their work, and there was a huge influx of people moving over to PeerTube as well as starting their own instances in order to spread out the hosting and make it less expensive for everyone involved. YouTube isn’t getting it for cheap, they’re just financed by one of the world’s largest companies and have huge amounts of revenue.
Yeah, If content creators (at least 1 in 10) ran their own instance, I think PeerTube could be a pretty good alternative and the cost would be split between instances.