• Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    yup, even youtube isn’t profitable. Video remains one of the largest sinks of resources. A 4K movie is stored on a disc of about 66GB, so about 30GB per hour of 4k video. Even with peertube it’d take the best hobbyists to run even a modest server for a few streamers. We’re talking people with PB level of storage capacities now with fiber lines to their house to truly host peertube alternatives, and if we’re talking cloud we’re talking thousands per month.

    It’s not impossible, I don’t want to get people down, but that’s the major hurdle

    • pootriarch@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      this is true. having said that - i follow a peertube-based french outfit called blast (can’t speak french, just look at the pictures). if i go to a different site (peertube.stream, liberta.vip) and look at a video, the streams are coming off video.blast-info.fr.

      there’s no question video is a huge resource suck, and that nobody would want to host a lot of other people’s videos. i just wonder, if the model is federated indexes but owner-hosted video, i wonder if there’s a use case that can work at scale.

      • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I do like the idea of having individuals host their own channels, but the bar for entry needs to become incredibly simple. Granted kids can spin up minecraft servers now, so at least that easy for online hosting. Self hosting is a bit more arduous for sure, but if people can host their own plex servers then I’d expect most video creators to be able to run peer tube - when it gets that easy.