• rumba@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      If a video doesn’t do well, it doesn’t need cached because it’s not being watched.

      They pay to store their flops.

      • Electricd@lemmybefree.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        I was reacting to this:

        Realistically, a quick death is probably a fortunate way to save resources if a video can’t gain traction from being useful or entertaining.

        • rumba@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          I’m even more confused now.

          You mentioned with the number of dead torrents that videos would die quickly.

          I mentioned that unpopular videos probably should die quickly.

          You mentioned that the solution won’t work I suspect your definition of not working is probably different than my definition of not working. But I’m not exactly sure at this point.

          • Electricd@lemmybefree.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            I thought you wanted videos to only be hosted through peers, without any server storing them, just like torrents

            I said that would mean most videos would die

            • rumba@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              Okay, yeah, that scans.

              By suggest the peeeing app, I’m also suggesting a change to the architecture then I’ve talked about previously, probably have not made clear here.

              The peering app works more like a torrent client. It’s not just caching things that you’ve seen, but you can also place your content there.

              We would separate the content from the indexing. A peer tube provider could offer both roles. People could store their own data locally or pay the provider a small amount to use their storage. Maybe even IPFS style that would just pin it for you for a fee. It would make the model sustainable.

              Everyone is responsible for their own seed content that way. Nobody is required to pay millions of dollars to store a bunch of bullshit for nothing that they don’t care about, which would end up making what monetization that can happen more effective.

              Advertisers are just pouring billions of dollars into YouTube. They could have direct payments to smaller providers much easier without all that waste. We just need a sustainable storage method in a way for people to get paid.

                • rumba@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Then they can stay on YouTube.

                  Federation can’t solve the price of storing / hosting video the same way that capitalism can.