We are getting reports of YouTube rolling out an experiment to some accounts where normal videos only have DRM formats available on the tv (TVHTML5) Innertube client.
This is not limited to yt-dlp. Tests have been run with the same account on various official YouTube TV clients (PS3, web browser, apple tv) and they are also only getting DRM formats for videos.
We live in hell-world.
Peertube is f****** amazing, But your average windows user isn’t going to be able to manage the hosting. And your average ISP blocks standard hosting ports. Then it also requires the users to manage their own monetization.
It’s not undoable but it is kind of a steep slope.
I joined it but the main feed was just a lot of NSFW content… So made it kind of awkward for discovery.
Discovery is a major hurdle. There are plenty of instances that don’t have NSFW you should poke around to find something suitable.
Feel free to recommend some!
With good content? That’s a hard find :)
Plenty without NSFW though
I frequent https://v.basspistol.org/ but they’re mostly music
do keep in mind you can also use their filters
like these on https://vid.freedif.org/
Everyone doesn’t have to host their own instance.
They don’t, but how long do you think a free instance is going to last when it starts seeing serious volume. Video storage in the cloud is expensive AF.
Yeah, video storage is what prevents corporations from creating YouTube competitors, and it also prevents decentralized users from competing
It doesn’t have to. PT is just using webtorrent. Make a desktop client that links into existing PT instances for discovery and indexing, but have the DHT pull the files right off the person’s home box. Every content creator makes a buddy, they pin each other’s content. Every content creator stores their own stuff + 1 person.
You can use an already hosted instance, there is no need to selfhost every service.
I think they were maybe speaking to the peer-to-peer “hosting” part of peertube. If not enough people are contributing to bandwidth, then more falls back to the server, increasing the cost to run it.
Mainly storage. The only reason these free hosted sites can stand up is because they have low traffic. If 0.01% of YouTubers started dumping all their video over there, they’d quickly run the free services out of town.
Realistically, If it were easy enough for everyone to host locally (torrent style) and people paired up with hosting partners for backups, peertube could be an amazing Youtube alternative.
Paying for bandwidth and cloud storage rates for video hosting is pretty much worst case. I’d argue that if you were going to self host anything video would be the most important