Object Storage is relatively cheap, and goes a long way towards affordable hosting. Processing video, on the other hand…
Comment on First Look: Loops, by Pixelfed
dudenas@slrpnk.net 3 days ago
If I understand it right… it will be much more costly to host videocentric platform than other types of content. A serious proposal for sharing the burden of hosting will likely be vital - through funding or decentralized storage/processing. Havent heard about that yet.
deadsuperhero@lemmy.world 3 days ago
barkingspiders@infosec.pub 3 days ago
I wonder about this a lot. The little research I did suggested DigitalOcean is footing the bill for the moment (and also for Pixelfed? would love to hear more about this). Google, Facebook, TikTok, etc… have all managed to throw enough resources at similar products that people expect a level of performance that is very expensive to maintain. There is some serious hardware and distribution issues ($$$$) with trying to host an “instant and endless stream of short form video”.
In a counter point though I think large instances like lemmy.world and lemmy.ml have found ways to survive and thrive and the fediverse generally seems to be supported in a very grassroots sort of fashion. Donations, patrons, people who have the hardware and bandwidth sharing what they can for the greater community. Perhaps loops will go the same way.
noodlejetski@lemm.ee 3 days ago
the videos get automatically deleted after some time.
NickwithaC@lemmy.world 3 days ago
The very first Youtube video is still up. Any serious competitor is going to need to offer that level of reliability with added benefits to woo users over.
noodlejetski@lemm.ee 3 days ago
have you thought that a platform for sharing short, vertical videos created by a single person perhaps isn’t trying to become a “serious competitor” for Youtube?
Jake_Farm@sopuli.xyz 3 days ago
Loops isn’t competing with youtube. I doubt you would be able to find the first tiktok.
JoYo@lemmy.ml 3 days ago
YouTube can’t even keep up with the amount of 4k and 8k video being fed into it.
what you’re seeing with ads is them trying to reduce their burden.
FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 days ago
the bottleneck to peertube seems to be populating and having more viewers, not hosting costs.
fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 2 days ago
The problem with Peertube, IMO, is you can’t just “join”.
Pick an instance, it’s locked down. I get it, hosting others video content is costly and dangerous, but it’s also a huge barrier.
Kichae@lemmy.ca 2 days ago
It’s best use case is self-hosting by established creators funded primarily by patreon subscribers, rather than new creators. But established creators won’t abandon the platform with their viewers. So, it’s a bit of a jam.
Fediverse platforms also just seem terribly uninterested in supporting creatives’ business models, so we get a high minded desert.
mosscap@slrpnk.net 2 days ago
Its true, but we do also have a proven base of both users and experienced admins that has proven to be resilient and self-sustaining even in the world where the winds of capitalism or VC money aren’t throttling growth.
dudenas@slrpnk.net 3 days ago
not sure about peertube audience size, but afaik it does have a serious subsystem of resource sharing.