so we already know that youtube doesn’t like people freeloading their bandwidth using something like invidious, piped, newpipe etc. why don’t they just close the public web api and require a login or something. by requiring login they can keep track of what users are watching and if a user is watching thousands of videos daily they can rate limit that user.

are they afraid of losing their user if they do so? I personally don’t think it can affect their business or profit. It will cut down their cost of bandwidth and computation costs. so why don’t just cut off users that don’t bring any revenue??

  • whoareu@lemmy.caOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    6 months ago

    what if YouTube crosses the line. which corporation is interested and have enough computing power to make a YouTube alternative?

    • YourAvgMortal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      6 months ago

      Meta made a twitter clone when they had the chance, they’ll happily make a YouTube clone.

      I don’t think Amazon or Microsoft are very interested in entering that market, but they are the only ones with the money and compute to support such a platform.

      Maybe Netflix could be interested? But I doubt it

      • NateNate60@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        32
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        People have seriously suggested that Mindgeek (Pornhub) could do it. Video content delivery infrastructure is eye-wateringly expensive but Mindgeek’s systems already deliver petabytes of content a day.

        This was memed a lot but if they seriously get involved then I think there’s a good chance that their competitor would genuinely be successful as long as they can correctly distance themselves from the pornography aspect of their business.

        Edit: They also own algorithms to find and recommend videos to users, robust commenting and user interaction features on their platform, and the placement and frequency of advertising are more or less acceptable on their platform.

        • HeavyRaptor@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Funnily enough Pornhub became kinda shit these last few years. Not because of overbearing advertising but because they periodically delete large amounts of their content, I think to appease payment providers. Kinda like the dmca takedowns on YouTube but much worse.

          • NateNate60@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Yeah, but I don’t fault them too much for that. They did have a revenge porn problem on their site. At the same time, they did not really have much of a choice either if they wanted to stay in business.

            This is just an indictment of the power payment providers have over our everyday lives, if nothing else. It highlights a need for neutral and accessible digital currency. This doesn’t necessarily refer to cryptocurrency either. Central banks around the world have the power to create content-neutral digital payment networks.

      • ouRKaoS@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        I could see TikTok trying to eat YouTube’s lunch with extended length, or Twitch offering videos.

        • ominouslemon@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          No, even if they wanted to, they have no expertise in UGC and they don’t have the infrastructure to do any of that

          • Jarix@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QuickTime?wprov=sfla1

            Quicktime was awesome. They could revisit what worked well about it.

            They have deep deep pockets and could throw money at it if they wanted to be come after the market.

            They already have a zealous fanbase that will ignore flaws.

            I think they could do it, if they wanted to. Would take time and they would have to bleed money for a while, anyone who tries to take on youtube would have to though

    • cAUzapNEAGLb@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 months ago

      Off the top of my head

      Potentially odeysee, peertube, or maybe even twitch, more likely I could see subscription platforms like patreon and nebula taking over

      Potentially something entirely new, I don’t know

    • Num10ck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      i’d love to see a peer-to-peer blockchain youtube replacement. like a limewire/napster type thing with thumbnails and discovery.

    • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Even with their recent efforts to squeeze money out of their users by killing adblockers and pushing even more intrusive ads, they still don’t make a profit. And that’s with 100% of the market share. There just isn’t a way for another company to come in and unseat youtube, and youtube knows it. Hence why they feel they can get away with pretty much any anti-consumer move they can dream up.

      They just have to keep users happy enough that nobody at microsoft/amazon decides to start their own money pit out of spite, and all that tasty data remains theirs for the indefinite future.