Rakn

My assumption was based on the idea to have a proper YouTube replacement. Not some run down video storage for a hand full of large content creators that can afford it.

• The scalability you buy via P2P also means an increased storage. So if you want to offer a similar platform that is used in a similar way then you probably would need a multiple of the current storage capacity that YouTube offers. Likely close to an exabyte of storage (assuming that YouTube has just about 300 petabytes. Which likely is a lower number by now.)
• Especially for the amount of users consuming the content you would need a good distribution factor. Popular content would need to be distribution over thousands of peers for it to kinda work out. So a lot of people could share the necessary video data, making the storage a problem.
• Big servers in a datacenter will always be more efficient because they are designed to be compared to consumer hardware. It's like replacing a central power plant with a small power plant per home. It won't deliver the same efficiency and is a waste of resources. Ecologically speaking.

creators already store their content locally

A lot of creators delete at least the raw footage because they don't have enough space and it would be too expensive. One creator hosting their own content wouldn't even begin to scale in such a scenario. They would need powerful hardware and serious network connectivity. Something the large creators probably could afford, but most couldn't.

peertube can run on rather old tech so I’d say it’s more efficient.

Especially old tech is less efficient than current generations.

tl;dr: I think you were talking about a small solution for large content creators where as I took it as a literal replacement for YouTube.

How would such a system be more efficient? That is very counter intuitive. In addition the question would be who pays for PeerTube. Because unlike Mastodon or Lemmy and the likes, storing large amounts of video files is actually damn expensive.

Oh das vermisse ich auch. Alle Spieleentwickler reden immer von den ach so tollen Social Funktionen und Communities. Aber effektiv ist alles viel anonymer geworden als früher.

Ich erinnere mich noch dran Battlefield einmal die Woche um eine feste Uhrzeit zu spielen. Immer auf dem gleichen Server auf dem dann auch die üblichen verdächtigen aufgeschlagen sind. War ne coole Zeit als man noch dieses „Ah guck mal der Squad ist heute auch wieder dabei“ Gefühl hatte.

Ist total verloren gegangen.

Also pro tip: Don’t meet with Meta. They aren’t good people.

Kinda sad they didn’t settle for something like Lemmy, but at the same time happy that they realize the value of a forum and didn’t just move to Discord.

I mean everyone seeks something different out of those communities. I do wish for the second option in general as well. But at the same time get a lot of value out of large communities with a lot of participants and content.

Depend on what you want or need and that’s different for a lot of folks.

That makes sense. I think this also shows a general misunderstanding. Lemmy isn’t and can’t be a replacement for something like Reddit at the end.

This comment captures it in my opinion. I feel like the entire post here is trying to sell something that most folks don’t really care about, failing to see why people are upset about it (rightfully so or not). A lot of theory that fails short in practice.

I understand why the admins did it. It’s relatable. But it should equally easily be understandable why some users don’t like it. “It’s a federation, visit a community with 5 members instead of 20k” isn’t the most helpful advice.

Nah. I don’t think it’s an education issue. E.g. I do understand how it works, but see defederation as the nuclear option. As a user in a federated system I don’t care where the communities are hosted that I frequent. As long as it works. That’s the entire point of federation. Otherwise we could just remove federation all together and have everyone create a separate account per instance.

I get where the beehaw admins are coming from and it’s understandable. But it’s not good and chips away at what Lemmy is and could be.

This is one instance now where this happened and I’m not on either of these instances, so I’m unaffected. But if I see more of these defederations (no matter where), the Signal it sends me is that for my needs I likely still have to bet on Reddit and at max this will become an occasional visit.

We are still far away from this point. Just saying. And a normal user can’t be expected to understand it or relate to it. It’s bad UX if they have to. Arguing for them to be educated about it is nice in theory, but misses in reality of how things just are.

Isn’t that something the bigger companies would also probably love to have? Because it creates an invisible barrier to entry at a certain scale.

Yeah and most people have USB-C chargers nowadays. It will just get rid of other connector forms and going forward unify it. It’s awesome.

If you are a heavy Apple user that might be annoying for you. But in the gran scheme of things that’s the minority.

It would be awesome if it could also support older iOS versions similar to how Apollo did it. I’m on an older iOS version (for reasons) and Mlem can’t be installed here. So I’ll going to jump on the first App that can :D

Meanwhile I’m using the website. But it’s UX is kinda not so great for mobile.