Another great article from 404 Media highlighting the power that the tech giants have amassed over how how we use the internet.

This brings me, I think, to the elephant in the room, which is the fact that Google has its hands on quite literally every aspect of this entire saga as a vertically integrated adtech giant.

This extreme power over the adtech and online advertising ecosystem is one of the subjects of an FTC antitrust suit against Google.

  • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    How about a decentralized, federated service instead of hoping a major corporation tries to “save” us?

    • DarkenLM@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      52
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think even a decentralized service could hold a mass equal to youtube. That would require that either the owners of all instances pay from their own pockets with mostly no income to support it, or that every user paid up, which is not going to happen, at least not in a service like youtube.

      • netburnr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Some of us are data holders and have Gigabit internet with options to go even higher. Don’t count out the little guys ability to share massive amounts of data… been doing it since zip drives and CDs

        • Traister101@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          28
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Let’s say only 500gb of video are uploaded every hour in this hypothetical federated YouTube (actual volume for the site looks to be ~200tb an hour). Are you honestly going to argue just that is even conceivably maintainable? You have to infinitely add storage space, multiple TBs a day.

          • Stantana@lemmy.sambands.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            Let’s say I run my own hypothetical, federated, userpeer-to-peer and opt-in server CDN function-platform, also known as PeerTube…

            I’d only accept those video uploads/uploaders I consider quality content.

            I’d love to host many content creator’s videos. From the goodness of my heart, for free, as a gift to you all. But certainly not all videos, and nowhere near 200 TB/h. But I can afford to host many TB’s without it impacting my private economy.

            That video of some idiot eating tidepods or whatever the current thing is? They could find somebody else that will host. Or if unable, host their own videos. Now we’re both happy.

            • Traister101@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              21
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I’d only accept those video uploads/uploaders I consider quality content.

              Cool, I like that idea unironically. So how are you going to do that? To accept only “quality uploads” you would have to somehow know, ahead of time if the uploaded content is acceptable. Sure maybe you have a white list but have fun maintaining that.

              Okay so different idea maybe you let people vote on the video somehow and delete videos that are deemed poor quality. Great! So now you burn through writes instead of storage itself which is probably desirable though it only lessens the need for more drives. There’s a flaw in this system though. How do you prevent a community from removing a video that’s been voted to be poor quality (IE fake “bad” reviews)? Are these videos gonna be manually reviewed? Manually reviewing would have the same immense maintenance problems as a whitelist so again have fun maintaining that.

              • 4am@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                The mistake was allowing the internet to become “the cloud” in the first place.

                People should be able to host their own shit on their own machine at home. This should be simple for people to set up, like a NAS with an App Store. Default to a secure config. Don’t make it too easy; if you try to sugarcoat it all, people won’t realize what they’re getting into (like now with cloud shit)

                Otherwise we get what we have now - everything from TVs to social media to fucking door locks and lightbulbs needs a connection back to the manufacturer, and they can drop support at any time. This allows the worst of rent-seeking under the guise of “everyone too dumb to do on their own”, very similar to “we must not allow security because bad guys could hurt KIDS” (while true, it’s just an excuse to read everyone’s mail to protect the ruling class from any negative opinion brewing)

              • Stantana@lemmy.sambands.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Uploaders would be manually screened at sign-up, I wouldn’t run an open server. Many fediverse servers in general and several PT-instances in particular does it. It works fine for a community based platform. It’s not meant to be one, monolithic server doing it all, open for all.

                There are many ways to handle storage requirements, I like datacenters with easily expandable storage.

                You bring up “have fun with that” but I’m having great fun already helping out running both a Mastodon and Lemmy instance. I don’t see how a video hosting service would be much different, in regards to moderation. Maybe I’m missing part of your point?

                • Traister101@lemmy.today
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  My moderation point is that with a video service you are forced to “watch” the content in the video in order to properly moderate (though you can just block people of course). You could have a bunch of filters like YouTube does to determine if your video should have ads and whatnot or you can rely on the community (or both).

                  The main issue with it is that we want to prevent “bad content” that being very poor quality content to skip being all detailed. To do that kind of filtering really requires some form of community review of the content as it’s infeasible to have it all manually reviewed. If you have a community review process you open the door to mass reporting and the like so you cannot simply automatically remove content if it gets a lot of reports, it must be manually reviewed (by watching the content) to ensure it’s fair to remove it. Lemmy, at least in my usage doesn’t have this desired “bad quality” filter outside of up votes/down votes which notably don’t remove the content (and so doesn’t remove the immense storage requirement)

                  • Stantana@lemmy.sambands.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    It seems like we have fundamental differences in how the fediverse could and should work. I don’t see this conversation going any further, thanks for the interaction.

            • xavier666@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              That video of some idiot eating tidepods or whatever the current thing is? They could find somebody else that will host

              Oh no! Censorship /s

              • Stantana@lemmy.sambands.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                No need to be sarcastic, in my kingdom I’ll be absolute ruler and “censor” and suppress others as I see fit.

                And everybody else is free to do the same and tell me to feck off.

                • xavier666@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I think censorship in the Fediverse works because you can always find a host which aligns with your ideology. Bad ideas automatically die out if the overwhelming majority of people stop spreading it, not because a giant megacorp decides it’s not a good message to show to their shareholders.

                  • Stantana@lemmy.sambands.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    But good ideas can be hidden from users if an admin bans instances or remote users. It’s a new type of censorship.

            • Jako301@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Great, so you pretty much only host established creators. Nearly all big channels on Youtube started with what is now considered shitty contend. They trained their editing skills over time, bought proper equipment once they really got into it and probably only found their style halfway through their “career”. If YouTube pre-filtered it’s videos, then the site would be dead by now.

              Sure you can shove all responsibility to someone else and say they should self host it, but then you also have to acknowledge that peertube and the like eliminate 98% of all content before its made with its cobsiderably higher entry point, and that includes the good and the bad.

        • kakes@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          Have you seen the sheer amount of data hosted by YouTube though? There’s no way any amount of hobbyists are going to hold a candle to that.

        • ubermeisters@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Except you don’t force licensing so you’ll get shut down immediately by some DMCA bullshit, by some asshole law firm.in another country probably.

    • Turun@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s still just as expensive, you’re just adding administrative overhead.

      You’d also spread the cost to more people, true, but who would operate a server for free (based on donations, but if it’s federated why should I pay for that one server?). Also, do you trust all those people to keep operating the storage for years to come? Or are you done with losing access to videos, because someone lost interest in running their instance?

      Storage and bandwidth costs for video on demand are so incredibly high, I don’t think we’ll get a federated alternative to YouTube any time soon.

    • Vipsu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Honestly this feels like the only possible way to win against Youtube. Goal could be to just create standardized decentralized platform where number of different companies/organizations can host and serve their own content while still being searchable and accessible from single client application.

      Major problem with Mastodon, Lemmy and Peertube is searching and browsing content from multiple instances is still difficult.

    • pascal@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      peertube started with that idea. Unfortunately is poorly maintained, also because humans are inherently evil, it’s a nightmare to moderate.