this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2023
170 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37343 readers
127 users here now
Rumors, happenings, and innovations in the technology sphere. If it's technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Tempted to looking in to self hosting video content, it’s a real storage hog, but if compressed, I imagine some of the mid sized youtube channels could afford to do so, the real shame will be the difficulty for smaller creators to get discovered without a common platform.
The problem isn’t storing it, it’s hosting and delivering content.
YouTube, Netflix, and all the other big streaming platforms have huge amounts of servers around the world delivering content with minimal latency and without saturating the Internet exchanges with gigantic amounts of data traffic.
If we were to do this peer-2-peer people would have to get used to waiting for pages and videos to load again.
So long as the video runs continuously once the page loads, I’m not particularly bothered by latency. Admittedly I’m not everyone, but I think most people care more about the content than the UX. I mean, hell, YouTube has a pretty miserable UX in different ways, not from lack skill on the part of the people who make and maintain it or limitations of technology, but from the poor cooperate incentives and goals that govern it.
It probably wouldn’t. Or you would have to wait a long time.
Try streaming from a site across the world and see how it is today. Then imagine saturating the networks with loads of it.
Would definitely need new infrastructure to cache popular content.