this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2024
661 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

59589 readers
3332 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] csm10495@sh.itjust.works 32 points 7 months ago (20 children)

Makes me miss a time where they couldn't tell if ads were actually watched or not.

Sooner or later, ad blockers should just simulate the ad being played (in the background) with the real content going in the foreground to act as if the ad was watched.

Kind of like going to the bathroom during commercials.

Then again I wish we had a real alternative to YouTube. (Don't point me to the fediverse video stuff ... that's not what I mean.) There is no real competition for a place to freely upload videos ... or on the other side find all that content. No one wants to scale enough to compete. (Very few probably could considering the amount of new content per minute).

If only there was real competition, then YouTube would have to fight over our attention/usage by lowering ad count.

No competition means worse for all.

[–] derpgon@programming.dev 4 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Well, YT is literally getting petabytes uploaded to it. Every single day. Thats 1000 terabytes, and thats 1000000 gigabytes.

I bet you haven't even seen a petabyte of storage in one place (assuming you didn't go to a data center yourself). How is a small company, or even fediverse, gonna handle that? Thats absolutely insane amount of data and, without moderation or curation, it is not feasible.

It's a giant waste of space and resources, to be honest. Most videos are seen once, and the rest is mostly spam or bad quality content.

[–] Specal@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Actually the cost issues wouldn't be the storage it's self. Storage is pretty cheap, it's content delivery networks. YouTube is supported by being owned and run by one of the worlds larges content delivery networks. There's virtually no latency, videos play immediately.

Having millions (potentially billions in YouTube's case) of people accessing data at once is an immense challenge and YouTube perfected it pretty early on, that's part of why there's no competition.

[–] derpgon@programming.dev 1 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Content delivery is not cheap, but not hard to do, either. I'd wager storage would be a bigger problem, because it just keeps rising. Sadly, YouTube is the one with money, and the monetization comes from people.

[–] Specal@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I can speak from experience that content delivery is harder than storage. Companies like YouTube tackle the storage issue by having tiered storage levels. Trending content is stored on SSDs, new and often viewed content is stored on harddrives with a caching system similar to optane and archived storage (essentially old videos that very rarely get views) goes on tape storage. It's really cool, and it allows massive about of storage in a small space, it's costs alot to implement but because of the tape storage they essentially have "infinite" (it's not really infinite of course but it's a problem for next decade not this decade).

[–] derpgon@programming.dev 2 points 7 months ago

Fair enough, but that's YouTube, who can afford all of it. Of course, if you have tons of money, you don't need to count pennies where counting them would just slow you down.

But take a competitor - how can a different service be viable if they lack money to have (virtually) infinite storage? Heavy moderation or monetization. Youtube kinda does the second one.

To reiterate, I am not saying you say things that are not correct.

[–] csm10495@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I remember seeing a startup at one point that wanted to put mini-CDNs in people's homes. Small black boxes that would automatically be a CDN not just for your home, but the whole area. Of course, sites would have to use their CDN network, etc.

I actually thought it was a really interesting idea. Almost like federated CDNs.

Imagine if every Xfinity router has a built-in 16TB CDN: it would be an interesting way to possibly change how bandwidth works and makes it back to the DCs. Most popular stuff would be closer, faster.

[–] Specal@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

God could you imagine the security risks though, having a physical risk in a network, that would be fun. Limewire on steroids.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

Well break it up "lemmy wise" or more? I mean nobody can replace youtube but it would be possible having your own fishing channel for example. If it gets wildly watched you probably have to figure out some sponsorship for sure.

BTW no I haven'tseen a PB storage, but I did write visualisation and computation software for treating and seing datastructures up to PB size with hdf5.

load more comments (17 replies)