I wish more publishers and creators could move away from YouTube, and stop relying (indirectly) on YouTube’s targeted ads.
There’s no silver bullet today, but a mix of alternative platforms (PeerTube, Nebula, Patreon…) and different way to get a revenue (subscription, donations, sponsors and non-targetted ad segments). I believe no alternative solution is feature-complete yet. Hopefully viewers will put some resources on alternatives, not just on AdBlock technologies, and follow creators who move away from YouTube.
The problem is that YouTube will always offer the best terms for initial creators. Hosting is free, the platform will sometimes help advertise you to your likely audience, and it may offer the first way to monetize the channel. A federated system isn’t going to provide nearly the same benefits.
YouTube does have the advantage of scale, I wouldn’t expect a federated solution to match their condition, but I’m hoping it can become good-enought as an alternative.
PeerTube isn’t going to provide a solution, they explicitly state this in their FAQ. But there’s no reason why other platform couldn’t handle monetization AND federate through AgtivityPub (or its successor). If Nebula or Patreon wanted, they could join the federation and make some videos accessible this way. The one holdout would be video that are only accessible to paid subscribers, they wouldn’t make them freely accessible via a federation.
the uploader can display a support button under the video […]
We did not go any further, as we refuse to tie our code to a particular content funding method, that might not fit all communities and deter others. It’s the reason why we encourage developers to use the PeerTube plugin API to create their own monetization system.
None of the three items I mentioned involved scale. Two of them mentioned cost to host and one mentioned advertising the creators’ work.
The CEO of Nebula has explicitly stated he isn’t creating a YouTube competitor. Nebula has a paywall which is important to its business model. It could never afford self hosting for free.
Even if PeerTube solves the hosting cost problem, you still have two advantages that a YouTube like system has over a PeerTube like system.
It’s interesting that no one is bringing up Vimeo in these discussions but I remember a thing a few years back where they disabled features that would make them a YouTube alternative (private links that you could share with your Patreons only or smth?) and when ask about this they stated that their target market isn’t small creators.
Anyway I would really hope that all this would bring people to Peertube like the Twitter implosion did for Mastodon and the Reddit fails for Lemmy but it doesn’t seem like it.
The iPod Touch 7 was great… but then they decided it didn’t actually deserve long term support even though it was the last version they’d be making. So go ahead and come out with an iPod Touch 8, Apple, but I won’t be trusting enough to buy it after getting burnt.
iPod touches were great for giving kids a small device without needing a cell connection. You could give them a iPhone without service but they cost way too damn much for that.
Ehhh with eu sideloading, right to repair and generally a good phone it looks like a good deal but i also think full software liberty(you can replace the software on it) is a part of RTR and i dont know if thats ever gonna happen especially with even android phones getting more and more restricted.
I don’t like giving money to Google but at least I can flash a free software operative system and I’m not in a golden jail under the tyrannic rule of a corporation.
I feel like going on an article about Apple and saying “but I don’t like apple” is a waste of screen real estate honestly. It’s such a pointless and stupid thing to say.
I think we are likely moving in the direction of a surveillance state, but not in the way that the UK or China do it. The State won’t spend billions on an extensive network of cameras and sensors, they will merely write laws that require private companies to hand over any footage deemed relevant.
This is already happening with companies like Ring. It makes sense when I think about it, because it saves billions of dollars and offloads all the infrastructure management onto the private sector while still reaping the benifits.
I hadn’t really thought about it like that until now. It is like a distributed surveillance network with almost zero cost and overhead, scary.
It’s been the strategy for decades. Facebook is also very useful to determine someone’s social graph, whereabouts, interests, etc. You don’t even have to have a Facebook account, if someone uploads a picture of you, they’ll create a ghost profile.
It really feels like they presented a road map at the beginning of the year and are sticking to it no matter what, neither looking at their own user base nor what is happening in the world of big social media right now.
They used to be cooler and their products have always provided a superior experience. They were counter culture in the 80s, 90s and 00s with their bluebox roots, anti-IBM/anti-Wintel marketing, tiny market share and focus on creators and education.
Now that they are successful they are essentially using Microsoft’s old playbook and bullying everyone into using their products. Really makes me sad.
You must not remember the steaming pile of shit that system 8 & 9 was. Their focus on the education market was to get a generation used to using their products and they would stay in the Apple ecosystem after school. Their investment in education was mostly a smokescreen. They’ve also been bullying since the iPhone 4 right after they started having success in the mobile market. Remember when they said you’re holding the phone wrong?
Anyone in the industry during that time knew Steve Jobs was an asshole during his first stint at Apple and even more so when he came back from NeXT. He laid the foundation for this behavior then built an empire. The culture doesn’t seem to have changed much.
I was always more of a dos/win95 and then Linux person but I did appreciate the Apple vibe and what they were trying to do with their ecosystem in terms of usability. The Wintel monopoly was a scourge but you’re right, Steve Jobs was also terrible.
Everyone that complained about the wintel dominance I always found humorous because their alternative was PowerPC which was developed by Apple IBM and Motorola and fabbed by IBM. Not saying it was or wasn’t better, it just didn’t feel like a better alternative on the surface with it being done up by IBM and Apple.
There were so many architectures and they’ve all fallen off the face of the earth. My favorite search engine when I was a kid ran on 2 DEC alpha servers.
You can’t conclude that from this. The fact that there was hype and excitement about this supports an interest in the concept. This was simply utterly horrible execution and that is all.
I don’t know about that. That a LOT of people liked that reveal TED talk.
If this was half the price, could hold a charge, didn’t start fires, and didn’t pull your shirt down, then it would still be dumb, but you’d probably have enough people buying it to keep the company alive.
That was a year ago, with 2 million views and 39k likes. That is not sign of hype. Specially when contrasted directly to the reality of sales.
Dear lord, you can see on the TED talk when he does the obviously planned big reveal, Imran Chaudhri doesn’t even get an applause. He actually pauses a few times in the conference waiting for the audience to applaud and nothing happens a couple of times. When he makes jokes almost nobody laughs. There’s even a point where he jumps the gun and says thank you before the spontaneous applause™ happens. That has to be the most cringe TED talk in history (and that’s hard because almost all of TED in the past 5 years is cringe), other than the fact it was just an obvious ad.
I just disagree and/or read different sources. There was considerable hype regarding this device across numerous tech sources and many people liked and still do like the idea. Clearly you don’t think everyone hated it do you? Using words like everyone or no one almost always means your sample is off or your are projecting an opinion.
Yeah, I don’t doubt there were people who were really hyped out of their minds for this. But it’s my impression they were a minority. Almost all press around the device was extremely skeptical, and only a few were cautiously excited. I follow a lot of tech circles in social media and there wasn’t really a buzz about the pin. But, I think the proof is in the pudding. 10,000 sales is not exactly evidence of an extremely popular device. Even if the end result was bad, if there was a lot of hype, one would expect higher sales. After all we knew the price and conditions of sales (subscription) for a long time before release.
I don’t think that’s the pudding. The device had a high bar for entry with its price and was a very novel tech device. Most people interested in the concept likely were reticent to pre-order and wanted to wait for early adopter reports to surface. I maintain that there is a viable market and sufficient enthusiasm for the technology / concept that the company promised, but obviously not the one they delivered.
I mean, sure. Several startups are making bank selling AI, not to individuals, but to companies. There is no money to be made long term on mediocre chatbots. No matter in what form factor they come, and unfortunately, this and the rabbit thing poisoned the market and clearly marked anything AI as a scam on buyer’s minds.
Edit: also, if the hype were really that high for such a device, then the rabbit should’ve sold a lot more units, since it was the budget version of the humane pin. But that wasn’t the case either. And now everyone knows both companies were just pump and dump scams.
Rabbit r1 garnered $10million in pre-order sales. How many should it have sold to impress you? The first 5 batches I think sold out within a day or days, production of the units appeared to be the bottleneck until people actually got a hold of them and reported on how awful they were.
You just seem bent on this whole issue. Is there a point you want to make? Or are you just upset about AI stuff in general?
My point is that the hype is very intense, but not massively distributed. I just try to promote critical thinking and reasoning by calling out bullshitters and retconners. Rabbit r1 sold 50000 units in a few days, that is in fact impressive, and a sign of a core audience that is very passionate about a concept. Of course, before it came out that they were in fact a scam company.
But, let’s look at the big picture. Worldwide, over 4 000 000 cellphones are sold…every day. Even if we look at just the US market, we are talking about 300 000 cellphone sales per day. This puts things in perspective. Tech enthusiast, compulsive buyers and obsessive nerds might hype up things to the moon and back. But the fact of the matter is that they are not representative of the market. The whole market of potential buyers of a computing device as a whole were at best mildly curious, and at worst entirely oblivious of the existence of the r1 and the humane pin.
But you ARE the bullshiter. You are not some voice of reason. The initial iPhone sold 270,000 units in its first two days. You can’t compare a novel tech device to something with decades of evolution.
Time will be the only judge here. You are making an opinionated statement about the interest of the global population that is speculation biased from your own personal opinion when there is data that suggests that opieis incorrect. Argue all you want or just Wait 10 years and see. But some sort of vert successful AI aasisitive enabled glasses, pin, Earbuds, or other wearable is a highly likely evolution of these early failures.
Yours is also an opinionated statement about the interest of the global population that is speculation biased from your own personal opinion. You presented some data, and I counterargued with my own data. Chill out. Neither of us is here debating for world peace or anything. But I would add that wisdom of the masses (votes) seem to agree with me. Which is further evidence that at least on this community, there was no hype. The nerd culture is actually very anti AI. It’s business bros that share your worldview.
They are not implying all Americans have poor internet, they are implying that most Americans have bad internet and are forced to use it due to non-competition.
RIP Unity. First they partnered with Ironsource. Who are the people behind InstallCore it’s a wrapper for bundling software installations. It tricks people into installing enough browser toolbars and other bloat to hurt their PCs. Windows Defender and MalwareBytes blocks it. Now Unity does this shit.
engadget.com
Top