zlacker

[parent] [thread] 83 comments
1. echoan+(OP)[view] [source] 2024-10-01 22:13:51
Easier said than done… if you are a YouTube creator, are you supposed to set up your own video hosting to compete? And how many of your viewers will move over to watch your stuff there? This advice probably works for blogs and mailing lists but isn’t really actionable for other content.
replies(14): >>paulry+G3 >>rlayto+pc >>chillf+ph >>btown+vp >>lolind+7r >>Mister+St >>Razeng+fu >>jimbob+tv >>magarn+kw >>naming+Ny >>nine_k+PC >>instig+881 >>j45+Jm1 >>dfxm12+YR1
2. paulry+G3[view] [source] 2024-10-01 22:38:50
>>echoan+(OP)
Well there is podcasting and PeerTube.
replies(3): >>whatsh+h4 >>giantr+v5 >>tshadd+E5
◧◩
3. whatsh+h4[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-01 22:43:15
>>paulry+G3
YouTube offers millions of dollars in free advertising to content creators along with tens of dollars in free hosting.
replies(2): >>paulry+o6 >>EarlKi+Gn
◧◩
4. giantr+v5[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-01 22:51:33
>>paulry+G3
With YouTube people can just click the "make money" button. YouTube handles the ad sales and payments. Both are your job if you're podcasting or publishing on PeerTube.

Hosting video content is not an unsolvable problem. YouTube's moat is economies of scale and user base. YouTube's draw is the "make money" button.

replies(1): >>EarlKi+ao
◧◩
5. tshadd+E5[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-01 22:52:12
>>paulry+G3
With podcasting you’ll almost certainly be reliant on being searchable on the major podcasting apps.

PeerTube is as close to nonexistent as a video platform can be.

replies(1): >>Spivak+Zx
◧◩◪
6. paulry+o6[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-01 22:57:52
>>whatsh+h4
Indeed, I was just trying to point out some decentralized alternatives.
7. rlayto+pc[view] [source] 2024-10-01 23:38:17
>>echoan+(OP)
I think one method here is to incorporate your own site into the content as much as possible. For example, if you are a creator, get people to sign up to a newsletter to get the source files. Get people onto your platform/forum/whatever as well as watching through YouTube. Easier said than done, but better than not doing anything.

From there, you also ensure that you have a backup of all your videos. I've talked to people that only had their stuff on YouTube/Facebook/whatever. It is super risky. If you have a backup, and YouTube bans you, you can rehost elsewhere, it won't be as big, but you might still have a business afterwards.

replies(2): >>azemet+Vh >>Cthulh+RR
8. chillf+ph[view] [source] 2024-10-02 00:19:22
>>echoan+(OP)
One way is to release videos 1-2 weeks early on your own site.
◧◩
9. azemet+Vh[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 00:23:53
>>rlayto+pc
Also something that needs to be noted, you don't need the same original numbers of people in your kingdom to make equivalent money.

When you're making commerce in someone's fief, they will demand tribute as well. In the confines of your own kingdom, all the ad dollars are yours.

Which also means you don't need to chase the same amounts of people to make similar coin, especially if the deals you make with advertisers are between you and the advertiser (not you, the advertiser, and the king of some other fief).

replies(1): >>george+xE
◧◩◪
10. EarlKi+Gn[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 01:23:35
>>whatsh+h4
It really doesn't. To understand why, you have only to comprehend the following: Whether someone is searching under a particular keyword, or just browsing whatever pops up on the home page, the average browser has a finite amount they're willing to scroll before abandoning their search... and chances are your video is NOT going to be placed highly in those results unless you're directing a firehose at it from offsite via Twitter, forum posts, news aggregators, or paying Youtube to promote your video flat out (which is such an obvious moneygrab on their part its disgusting). In other words: If you rely on their algorithm to promote your work you're literally playing the lottery and, much like the lottery, statistically you're going to lose. It makes far more sense to find bandwidth and hosting, negotiate with an ad network, and direct a firehose at the resulting site... but that's more work than some are willing to do. shrug Oh well.
replies(2): >>ako+nG >>speff+zc1
◧◩◪
11. EarlKi+ao[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 01:27:55
>>giantr+v5
The "make money" button, however, is an illusion for 99% of publishers. The one case where it does seem to make out is with livestreams, and then only because unlike topical short-form videos, streaming is not a winner-take-all environment where one or two people run away with all the eyeballs, but instead people will tend to decommoditize topical streaming based on the personality of the broadcaster and your ability to form a parasocial relationship with them... hence even a relatively unknown person, if they're persistent, can manage to grab a few hundred regular viewers who'll toss a few bucks each stream... not enough to make a living, but enough for beer money. The prime advantage of youtube in this scenario is not having to deal with setting up hosting/DDoS filtering and negotiating with a payment processor ... just push the button and upload. So for streamers I think it can still be worth it, but for people posting short form content I think they might be better off rolling their own because they can't rely on Youtube's algorithm to give them enough eyeballs to be profitable.
12. btown+vp[view] [source] 2024-10-02 01:41:06
>>echoan+(OP)
There's an entire OTT sub-industry for video hosting and out-of-the-box monetization: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Over-the-top_media_service

For instance, https://vimeo.com/ott is an effective (albeit expensive) option, powering Dropout (formerly CollegeHumor) and other brands and allowing them to focus on content. Dropout, in particular, has found an effective model of releasing short clips from their improv-heavy shows on social video platforms, gaining virality there while subtly reminding new and old fans that they can find full episodes, and support on-screen and off-screen talent, by subscribing to the brand directly. Their growth would be impacted by the loss of a marketing channel, but not their underlying subscription fundamentals.

(The entire Dropout business story is quite inspiring and worth a watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRK_gNfFdP0 )

replies(1): >>JBiser+Uw
13. lolind+7r[view] [source] 2024-10-02 01:57:57
>>echoan+(OP)
Your YouTube example is exactly what gave rise to Nebula.tv—creators banded together to create an alternative that would backstop them against YouTube's dominance.
replies(2): >>kalleb+yJ >>echoan+xS
14. Mister+St[view] [source] 2024-10-02 02:38:31
>>echoan+(OP)
A high school friend of mine contacted me out of the blue on facebook after probably 20 years. He had gotten on early with an MLM that made it big and one of them had such success on the platform that he had made multiple appearances at their national convention to give a testimonial to how it changed his family's lives. Mind you, this is a guy who was 2 years from being able to retire with a pension from the chemical refinery he worked at.

I laughed, told him I wasn't interested, and warned him that he didn't own his network: that the MLM could take it from him at any time, and it's why most of the experienced salesmen I knew lived well below their paychecks. He grew very upset, told me I didn't know what I was talking about, and basically behaved as if I had insulted his religion.

Well, half a year later I was laid off and found a new job with a marketing automation firm. On my second day, we had an all hands meeting where they were announcing that the MLM he worked for would be immediately breaking contract and leaving our platform because they reached a settlement with the DOJ over their methodology. Effective immediately, they were going to a distributor model and ceasing all payouts for network related sales.

I knew his world was going to collapse before he did. In the end, he had to sell his house and most of his possessions, his wife divorced him, and he tried to break back into the MLM world but could never get anything started. Nobody wanted to hire him for a traditional sales role because they regard MLMers as lazy and dumb. He's back at another chemical refinery, hoping to work there for another 20+ years to earn another pension.

replies(1): >>liotie+8k1
15. Razeng+fu[view] [source] 2024-10-02 02:44:42
>>echoan+(OP)
> if you are a YouTube creator, are you supposed to set up your own video hosting to compete?

They could use their popularity to promote and donate to alternatives.

16. jimbob+tv[view] [source] 2024-10-02 03:01:34
>>echoan+(OP)
The optimal strategy would probably be to start on YouTube and then migrate to your own platform once you can afford it and have an audience willing to come with you.

Then probably dual stream for a while on your site with blended chat support before cutting the YouTube cord loudly and with warning.

17. magarn+kw[view] [source] 2024-10-02 03:11:55
>>echoan+(OP)
Some of them have, it's called Nebula.
◧◩
18. JBiser+Uw[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 03:21:39
>>btown+vp
That sounds incredibly interesting! Thanks for sharing that!

The YouTube link at the end is ironic ;-)

◧◩◪
19. Spivak+Zx[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 03:38:40
>>tshadd+E5
Podcasting is actually worse. YouTube is a kingdom where people come to you. In podcasting there are a few large kingdoms and you have to be in all of them because of the "wherever you get your podcasts" thing.
replies(1): >>JacobT+Za2
20. naming+Ny[view] [source] 2024-10-02 03:49:14
>>echoan+(OP)
You're omitting the choice of just not doing that in the first place.

If you want to be a Windows developer, then yes, you have to be a Windows developer in order to be a Windows developer.

But you don't have to want to be a Windows developer. You don't even have to want to be a developer.

replies(1): >>devjab+gJ
21. nine_k+PC[view] [source] 2024-10-02 04:38:48
>>echoan+(OP)
If you are a "YouTube creator", you have already firmly planted your castle on Google's land. The positioning of onself as bound to a particular website run by someone else is needless loss of independence.

Position yourself as a video creator and post your videos also to Instagram (when possible) and to Vimeo. Seed free / back catalog episodes via a torrent. Run a mailing list announcing and discussing your videos, with some premium content for paying subscribers only. Maybe have an X / SkyBlue / mastodon feed with more compact announces, comments, and high-virality short clips from your longer videos.

Cross-link and cross-reference all the channels of your presence. Make your brand recognizable across the publishing methods. Gently prod people to touch more than one channel of your video distribution, just to get the most avid viewers acquainted with several.

Yes, this is significantly more work. It also may bring significantly more results if your videos are good. This gives you a much stronger assurance that your brand and your following will not be lost, should you lose access to YouTube / Instagram / Vimeo / X / whatever other platform. Commoditize your complement, as they say.

replies(5): >>CJeffe+IF >>kalleb+JI >>keifer+LK >>tdeck+7L >>j45+4n1
◧◩◪
22. george+xE[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 04:58:25
>>azemet+Vh
Exactly. You can be huge on Youtube or tiktok and if you convert some of that to direct engagement you are much better able to survive a changing landscape.
◧◩
23. CJeffe+IF[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 05:16:50
>>nine_k+PC
Can you suggest a few video creators who are having success with this model? I watch quite a few video creators, and don’t know any trying to use this model.
replies(7): >>mvdtnz+ZI >>Elinvy+ZQ >>Grumbl+Aa1 >>sumtec+sh1 >>lucian+En1 >>rchaud+yx1 >>albert+c62
◧◩◪◨
24. ako+nG[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 05:27:51
>>EarlKi+Gn
If you place it on a website you’ll also be subjected to their algorithm, google search.
replies(1): >>EarlKi+n62
◧◩
25. kalleb+JI[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 05:55:52
>>nine_k+PC
Vimeo only gives you 2 TB bandwidth/month without negotiating an Enterprise plan. If your video goes viral, you're going to be out thousands to host it for everyone. How are you going to pay for that? You could put it on credit and then show these numbers when manually negotiating the payout from your next sponsor and pay it back with the proceeds from the next video, but there's no guarantee your next video will be also a hit.
replies(3): >>Animat+yd1 >>passwo+VR1 >>accoun+Tid
◧◩◪
26. mvdtnz+ZI[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 05:59:52
>>CJeffe+IF
No, he can't, because there are none. It's a ludicrous model that exists only in the minds of HN commenters.
◧◩
27. devjab+gJ[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 06:02:36
>>naming+Ny
I think the difference between development for a “real” OS is that windows is still mainly owned by its customers. Similar to how MacOS is. On MacOS people can still install your applications even if you don’t pay the Apple tax to avoid their pop-up warnings. (I’m not sure if avoiding the windows warnings is also something you pay Microsoft for.)

I think a better comparison would be iOS or Chrome, where you’ll realistically have to submit yourself to their stores if you want to reach most users. Which is sort of even more locked down than YouTube as some content creators on YouTube have managed to move their audience to other platforms, though sometimes by still posting teasers or at least some content on YouTube.

◧◩
28. kalleb+yJ[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 06:06:22
>>lolind+7r
Another example is Floatplane which was bootstrapped by the Linus Tech Tips people after realized how dependent they were on YouTube.
◧◩
29. keifer+LK[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 06:21:32
>>nine_k+PC
This is all good advice but realistically you can probably skip the random social media sites and just do email and YouTube. Email is much, much better than pretty much any social network.
replies(3): >>nine_k+EU >>zelphi+D81 >>gilbet+0E1
◧◩
30. tdeck+7L[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 06:25:54
>>nine_k+PC
Dave Jones from the EEVBlog does this - he cross posts to his own site and to many smaller video hosting sites. But if I remember correctly he has said in the past that almost all his viewership comes from YouTube. Unfortunately for long-form videos in English YouTube seems to be the only game in town in terms of discoverability.
replies(1): >>nine_k+bV
◧◩◪
31. Elinvy+ZQ[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 07:29:20
>>CJeffe+IF
LinusTechTips literally built their own video hosting site - Floatplane - exactly for this reason, to have a backup in case YouTube nukes their channel.
replies(1): >>throwa+iR
◧◩◪◨
32. throwa+iR[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 07:33:19
>>Elinvy+ZQ
Which is increasingly likely as they manually removed his video about adblock.
◧◩
33. Cthulh+RR[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 07:40:54
>>rlayto+pc
Yeah, every YT creator that is serious about their job should have their own website with a copy of the videos, and I find it really curious that this doesn't seem to be much of a thing? At best I'm seeing merchandise webshops. But you'd think these people would be multi-channel and have a website, youtube, all the social medias, etc, and the bigger ones a company to manage them all.

But I suspect that as they get bigger, they enter in exclusivity / no-compete contracts with Youtube, and if they detect the same video hosted elsewhere, they get taken down or something.

replies(1): >>Y_Y+AW
◧◩
34. echoan+xS[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 07:48:56
>>lolind+7r
And how many people are on nebula compared to YouTube?
replies(1): >>nine_k+lb1
◧◩◪
35. nine_k+EU[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 08:13:02
>>keifer+LK
Mail lists go far, but retweets go wide. Different tools for different purposes.
replies(1): >>keifer+3W
◧◩◪
36. nine_k+bV[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 08:20:20
>>tdeck+7L
While you're tiny, you need discoverability a lot. But even if YouTube bans you and deletes all your videos, you lose relatively little.

The bigger you are, the more well-known, the larger is your following, and the more the whole enterprise is the source of your livelihood, the more you may need to hedge your bets.

replies(1): >>tdeck+UQ2
◧◩◪◨
37. keifer+3W[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 08:29:54
>>nine_k+EU
Sure, but in my experience it's better to have 1000 solid email subscribers than have your tweet seen by 100k people. Even moreso for something like TikTok, where you can get millions of views but capitalize on virtually none of them.
replies(1): >>author+CS1
◧◩◪
38. Y_Y+AW[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 08:35:48
>>Cthulh+RR
This sounds like an opportunity for a product. Apart from eyeballs and familiarity, Youtube does a lot of handholding so that non-technical people van run their own channels. I don't think 90% of youtubers would have any idea how to spin up a website. But I'm sure they'd be happy to pay someone to do it for them (as long as the price was a small fractuon of their ad revenue).
39. instig+881[view] [source] 2024-10-02 10:50:09
>>echoan+(OP)
With videos you can start by retaining control of your channel configurations and making it independent from any particular video hosting provider. See this for inspiration (not promoting it, just the gist of the idea): https://grayjay.app/
◧◩◪
40. zelphi+D81[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 10:55:31
>>keifer+LK
Somehow you will need to reach people, at least initially, though. They don't magically appear on your mailing list.
◧◩◪
41. Grumbl+Aa1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 11:16:59
>>CJeffe+IF
Personally I have seen a few over the years come and go. Podcasts (Adio and Video) for example often tried to use youtube as an additional channel, but still maintain their websites and RSS feeds.

It seems these days, most Youtube creators are at least somewhat aware of the problem and have websites, discord channels, patreons etc. While I still think many would struggle if they lost their youtube access suddenly, they do have additional channels to reach out to at least part of their audience.

◧◩◪
42. nine_k+lb1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 11:24:29
>>echoan+xS
All the 1000 of your mailing list subscribers? Or maybe 10k.

You start needing alternatives when you're already established and have a following. With this comes large enoug influence and thus the ability / risk to step on some big toes, including Google's.

◧◩◪◨
43. speff+zc1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 11:36:18
>>EarlKi+Gn
This is an amateurish take on marketing yourself on YouTube. The algorithm is /not/ like the lottery. My wife is a content creator on YT and hasn’t spent a dime on advertising. The free advertising isn’t in the form of search result placement (mostly) but rather the algorithm showing your videos next to more popular related videos. That’s why the absolute most important thing for video promotion isn’t the material itself, but rather the title/thumbnail combination. People are generally bad at understanding this and/or bad at marketing themselves so they attribute their lack of success as random chance

And unless your audience is very tech oriented, they’re not going to switch off whatever platform the ads are on to watch videos hosted elsewhere. You’d need to ask a LOT of people (= a large amount of $$$) and hope a few of them make it over a bit at a time

replies(1): >>EarlKi+e62
◧◩◪
44. Animat+yd1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 11:45:33
>>kalleb+JI
> If your video goes viral

That's what PeerTube is supposed to be for. You can set up a PeerTube host yourself. Or there are some public PeerTube hosts that accept uploads. When people are watching your videos, the ones with good bandwidth are also hosting them for other users. The hosting site is just handling the original copy and coordinating the peers. (This isn't like Bittorrent; hosting is centralized but playout is distributed. When no one is watching, the only copy is on the original server.)

PeerTube really should be popular like WordPress, for self-hosted content. But it's not. Neither Google nor Bing indexes PeerTube sites, so there's no discovery. Few PeerTube videos have more than a handful of viewers. I use PeerTube for technical videos, to keep them ad-free, and it works fine for that low-volume application.

Here's the Blender 4.2 showcase reel on PeerTube.[1] It's a good demo. Will it overload if watched by many HN users? Please try.

[1] https://share.tube/w/uYK7X52m2Y7RyahL4wjKaM

replies(2): >>immibi+lh1 >>Zak+4R1
◧◩◪◨
45. immibi+lh1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 12:13:43
>>Animat+yd1
PeerTube is just a self-hosted video platform. Video bandwidth is legitimately expensive. You'll still be out a bunch of money if your video goes viral.
replies(3): >>j45+hn1 >>treyd+tB1 >>Animat+In2
◧◩◪
46. sumtec+sh1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 12:14:41
>>CJeffe+IF
I have seen a few do the conversion. They usually start by cross posting on any video site they can. X, Rumble, locals, self hosting, discord, with usually some sort of patreon model of funding with maybe ad reads. Then what is left on YT is highlights of their other longer form content on other sites. The kicker is they do not need as many people following them as YT is not taking the majority of the ad revenue cut.

But if you want to see people trying to make the conversion just scroll the front page of Rumble. Many of them are trying to get out form under youtube and many have YT channels too. But Rumble is just another YT waiting to happen and they know it.

◧◩
47. liotie+8k1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 12:36:42
>>Mister+St
> 2 years from being able to retire with a pension > [..] > hoping to work there for another 20+ years to earn another pension

I don't understand that... If he was two years from retiring, then he only needed two more years of salaried employment somewhere lese - didn't he ? What country did he live in ?

replies(2): >>Mister+BC1 >>lotsof+4S1
48. j45+Jm1[view] [source] 2024-10-02 12:54:46
>>echoan+(OP)
A huge part of the world forwards videos primarily on WhatsApp. And links to YouTube.

Your question seems to connect discovery of videos and distribution.

Video hosting is getting easier. There’s platforms like avideo that are relatively easy to host.

Many companies use alternatives already like or Vimeo.

Hosting your video permanently first from your own setup isn’t too far fetched.

YouTube can be secondary.

Many people use social media to build their own email lists and communities.

YouTube can achieve the same. At the same time I think YouTube is more going to eat cable tv up or at least offset it more first.

◧◩
49. j45+4n1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 12:56:43
>>nine_k+PC
Nice summary. There are tools out there that can help with chunks of this, but understanding the pieces as you’re laid out is critical.

Since a lot of creators today were consumers first of content, they miss the side when there was little social or video to consume online, and in turn creating was the default.

◧◩◪◨⬒
50. j45+hn1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 12:58:17
>>immibi+lh1
There are cdns that can help..
replies(1): >>Michae+fy1
◧◩◪
51. lucian+En1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 13:00:01
>>CJeffe+IF
There's nebula.tv.

The people there are both video creators and their own hosts, or so I read. Got together and built themselves a host because YT was not what they needed.

replies(1): >>tdeck+dG2
◧◩◪
52. rchaud+yx1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 14:00:00
>>CJeffe+IF
Most videographers are actively trying to be seen, are they not? How else would they transition into an agency/studio job with real customers and projects? I've never heard of a videographer that would accept obscurity in exchange for tech/platform sovereignty.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
53. Michae+fy1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 14:04:25
>>j45+hn1
The core issue is that someone has to pay a lot for a lot of bandwidth, or a lot of someone’s paying a bit each.
replies(1): >>j45+7O1
◧◩◪◨⬒
54. treyd+tB1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 14:24:41
>>immibi+lh1
That's why it's built on WebTorrent, to share the load across users and instances.
replies(1): >>immibi+pR1
◧◩◪
55. Mister+BC1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 14:33:44
>>liotie+8k1
The US. Your pension, if you get one, is tied to your employer. Most people have 401Ks.
replies(1): >>liotie+07b
◧◩◪
56. gilbet+0E1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 14:44:17
>>keifer+LK
Email? Outside of the older crowd, I don't know anyone that actively uses email for anything. So many people in my life are surprised when my wife and I use email for anything. Tech/business/academic might hit some ok % with email, but outside of that I'd doubt you'd get to 1% of your potential audience.
replies(2): >>keifer+SE1 >>Suppaf+lf2
◧◩◪◨
57. keifer+SE1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 14:50:39
>>gilbet+0E1
Email is generally considered the best channel in the marketing industry. It’s absolutely not just something for old people.
replies(1): >>sushid+Xo2
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
58. j45+7O1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 15:41:35
>>Michae+fy1
I've been connecting the dots in video/bandwidth delivery.

While I was digging up an additional link, it appears Cloudflare R2 allows no egress fees.

https://www.cloudflare.com/developer-platform/r2/

10GB free to host, no egress fees.

Combined with a cloudflare worker, it seems reasonable that the object storage could be managed.

replies(1): >>immibi+9R1
◧◩◪◨
59. Zak+4R1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 15:56:52
>>Animat+yd1
> Neither Google nor Bing indexes PeerTube sites, so there's no discovery.

That's not search engines discriminating against it in this case.

https://share.tube/robots.txt

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
60. immibi+9R1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 15:57:27
>>j45+7O1
Now your castle is in someone else's kingdom. And in Cloudflare's kingdom, always be ready to get an email: "pay us $150,000 in 24 hours or we cancel your service"
replies(1): >>j45+PT1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
61. immibi+pR1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 15:59:11
>>treyd+tB1
Removed end of 2023: https://github.com/Chocobozzz/PeerTube/issues/5465
replies(1): >>treyd+J42
◧◩◪
62. passwo+VR1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 16:02:06
>>kalleb+JI
Host on a provider with "unlimited" data transfer (the legit ones are capped by rate eg. 100mbps etc.).
replies(1): >>accoun+Zjd
63. dfxm12+YR1[view] [source] 2024-10-02 16:02:31
>>echoan+(OP)
Another option is to consider that "YouTube creator" should not be treated as anything more than a hobby; it should certainly not be your identity/job title. Unless you have some sort of contract with Alphabet, your videos are hosted at their pleasure and you are owed nothing. Your time is likely better spent not bolstering someone else's library of content.
◧◩◪
64. lotsof+4S1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 16:03:24
>>liotie+8k1
In the US, pension is short for “defined benefit pension”, most often a provided by a single employer stipulating that you work at that employer for a minimum number of years, and the longer you work at one employer, the greater the benefit.

They only exist at taxpayer funded employers or legacy businesses like oil and gas, but most everyone else has switched to defined contribution pensions, but those are referred to as “401k” or “401b” or some other letter for the appropriate section of the law that specifies the tax benefit of saving for retirement.

The latter are better ever since low cost index funds came about, as you get to skip paying the DB pension administrators and remove agency risk.

replies(1): >>Mister+v22
◧◩◪◨⬒
65. author+CS1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 16:06:04
>>keifer+3W
Email has the problem though that Gmail suddenly in one fell swoop blackhole you for 80% of your readers.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
66. j45+PT1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 16:13:17
>>immibi+9R1
My original comment was using a group of cdns. I think there’s a few.

In this case you’re already paying for storage so egress is free.

A 10 gig fibre connection is another way to start.

The internet always costs someone.

◧◩◪◨
67. Mister+v22[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 16:57:03
>>lotsof+4S1
Virtually all people who have worked and retired at oil and gas companies over the past 40 years had both a company pension AND a 401K. My dad has a paid off house and no bills other than utilities and taxes. He's pulling in over 80K a year in retirement, and he re-invests most of what he's being forced to pull out.
replies(1): >>lotsof+Cz2
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
68. treyd+J42[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 17:10:45
>>immibi+pR1
I saw elsewhere that it's planned on being readded after the rearchitecting work that's mentioned in that issue.
◧◩◪
69. albert+c62[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 17:19:57
>>CJeffe+IF
one possible example -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ht9GwXQMgpo

i saw they post pretty well produced videos on youtube -- for folks like me

but also promote a more elaborate/detailed video series on the same/related topics on a separate subscription based platform

◧◩◪◨⬒
70. EarlKi+e62[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 17:20:18
>>speff+zc1
> My wife is a content creator on YT and hasn’t spent a dime on advertising.

Is your wife a representative sample of all Youtubers? If not, your datum is irrelevant.

> unless your audience is very tech oriented, they’re not going to switch off whatever platform the ads are on to watch videos hosted elsewhere.

Having now witnessed multiple creators hop from one platform to another and drag their audiences with them because they're JUST THAT ENTERTAINING... no, you're wrong. People will gladly follow artists to a better platform if it means they're able to make a living and/or not be censored.

◧◩◪◨⬒
71. EarlKi+n62[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 17:21:05
>>ako+nG
The point of going to your own site, though, is not to rely on algorithms, but construct your own marketing funnel.
◧◩◪◨
72. JacobT+Za2[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 17:47:11
>>Spivak+Zx
There is a quasi-open podcasting index that many podcasting apps use.

It's here: https://podcastindex.org/

◧◩◪◨
73. Suppaf+lf2[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 18:10:40
>>gilbet+0E1
>Email? Outside of the older crowd, I don't know anyone that actively uses email for anything.

This, it's surprising and somewhat annoying, but people ~20ish and younger pretty much just don't use email.

◧◩◪◨⬒
74. Animat+In2[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 19:04:28
>>immibi+lh1
No, that's the whole point of PeerTube. PeerTube scales up by spreading the playout load amongst everyone who is watching at the moment. If a thousand people are watching your video, most of them are getting the content from the cache of others who are also watching at the moment. Not from the hosting server.

This works well only if many of the watchers have significant upload bandwidth and aren't behind firewalls that prevent them from outputting blocks of video.

This is different from torrent-type systems or Usenet, which distribute persistent copies. With Peertube, only the original server permanently hosts the video. Everybody else is just caching. So the disk usage of watchers isn't that big.

It's all done in the browser.

◧◩◪◨⬒
75. sushid+Xo2[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 19:11:32
>>keifer+SE1
That's because the "marketing industry" is filled with those using emails. It is absolutely just for old people at this point.
◧◩◪◨⬒
76. lotsof+Cz2[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 20:30:59
>>Mister+v22
But now people working for profitable businesses can do mega backdoor roth contributions and still invest in the same VOO equities that the pension fund manager would invest in, but cut out all of the agency risk and not be tied to their employer.
replies(1): >>Mister+Zl5
◧◩◪◨
77. tdeck+dG2[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 21:28:39
>>lucian+En1
Is there anyone on Nebula who didn't build their audience through YouTube?
replies(1): >>fsflov+6T3
◧◩◪◨
78. tdeck+UQ2[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-02 23:13:58
>>nine_k+bV
It always makes sense to have a backup, but the issue is that video creators are always naturally losing viewers and need to replace them by new viewers who discover their channel(s). It seems like the new viewer discovery is all happening on a very short list of giant platforms which is a bit worrying. Personally I like the way podcasts have managed to be more decentralized but I also fear podcasting is slowly becoming YouTube centric.
◧◩◪◨⬒
79. fsflov+6T3[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-03 11:50:02
>>tdeck+dG2
You can build your audience through YouTube and then diversify.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
80. Mister+Zl5[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-03 21:47:21
>>lotsof+Cz2
Yes, but that's an insanely small minority of people. The average person in my hometown makes $70K a year with overtime and has a $320K house. They're not loading up IRAs. They don't have the money to spare.
replies(1): >>lotsof+Tw5
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
81. lotsof+Tw5[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-03 23:18:03
>>Mister+Zl5
The people getting meaningful DB pensions and 401k are also an insanely small minority, hence them getting it in the oil and gas business, which has fat profit margins, like tech companies.

My point is it’s better for the employee who is getting paid a lot (whether it be oil and gas or tech) to receive their compensation in fully liquid cash they can invest in a broad market index fund, rather than have it be held hostage (see agency risk). Plus the employee maintains more leverage to be able to sell their labor to other employers.

◧◩◪◨
82. liotie+07b[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-06 14:53:30
>>Mister+BC1
In a country that promotes social mobility, I don't understand how pensions tied to the employer subsist: it strongly discourages changing employers.
◧◩◪
83. accoun+Tid[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-07 13:45:16
>>kalleb+JI
How do you think Google pays for it?
◧◩◪◨
84. accoun+Zjd[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-07 13:53:18
>>passwo+VR1
Exactly. At the end of the day Google has to pay for that bandwith too, and they manage to do it with only ads. Bandwith is not as expensive as some people think, many hosting companies just like to overcharge.
[go to top]