PeerTube, the 'Decentralized YouTube,' Succeeds In Crowdfunding (quariety.com) 100
A crowdfunded project, known as "PeerTube," has blown through its initial goal with 53,100 euros collected in forty-two days. The project aims to be "a fully decentralized version of YouTube, whose computer code is freely accessible and editable, and where videos are shared between users without relying on a central system." The goal is PeerTube to officially launch by October. Quariety reports: PeerTube relies on a decentralized and federative system. In other words, there is no higher authority that manages, broadcasts and moderates the content offered, as is the case with YouTube, but a network of "instances." Created by one or more administrators, these communities are governed according to principles specific to each of them. Anyone can freely watch the videos without registering, but to upload a video, you must choose from the list of existing instances, or create your own if you have the necessary technical knowledge. At the moment, 141 instances are proposed. Most do not have specifics, but one can find communities centered on a theme or open to a particular region of the world. In all, more than 4,000 people are currently registered on PeerTube, for a total of 338,000 views for 11,000 videos. The project does not display ads, unlike YouTube. "In terms of monetization, we wanted to make a neutral tool," says Pouhiou, communication officer for Framasoft, the origin of PeerTube. The site will rely on a "support" button at the start, but "people will be able to code their own monetization system" in the future.
Subjects are dumb (Score:5, Interesting)
Wouldn't this just be a "youtube" front-end for torrents?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't LBRY users have to buy LBC on an exchange in order to publish a video, especially if another member of the same household also uses LBRY?
Authors are dumb. Federal is centralized authority (Score:2, Informative)
The author is also dumb
--
federative system. In other words, there is no higher authority that manages, broadcasts and moderates the content offered, as is the case with YouTube, but a network
--
Someone does know what federation is, and therefore contradicts themselves. Apparently they haven't even heard of the federal government, which is the "higher authority", above the states.
A federal system, or federation, is when previously separate entities establish a centralized authority, for common purposes. Examp
Typo: doesn't (Score:3)
That should be "someone doesn't know"
Supremacy clause (Score:2)
> US does not have higher authority over all the different laws, that states and even counties have
The Constitution diagrees with you:
--
US Constitution, Article VI, Clause 2:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the C
Re: (Score:2)
It does not regulate shape of pen... cucumber, that EU lawmakers blundered into.
Careful your bias is showing...
The EU did not, nor did they attempt to, regulate the shape of cucumbers. They legislated on the labeling (or marketing, if you prefer) of cucumbers.
It should require but a moments thought to differentiate between the two.
(if you're still unclear on the difference, there's a bloke over there who has a green banana to sell you - just don't put it in a fruit salad!)
Re: (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
On 29 July 2008, the European Commission held a preliminary vote concerning the repeal of certain regulations related to the quality of specific fruit and vegetables that included provisions related to size and shape. According to the Commission's press release, "In this era of high prices and growing demand, it makes no sense to throw these products away or destroy them." The Agriculture Commissioner stated, "This is a concrete example of our drive to cut red tape and I will continue to push until it goes through. [...] It shouldn't be the EU's job to regulate these things. It is far better to leave it to market operators." Regulation 1221/2008 took effect as of 1 July 2009. Though neither the press release cited above nor Regulation 1221/2008 made any mention of bananas or Regulation 2257/94, some reports of the changes treated them as including the banana quality standards regulation and contained explicit or apparent references to this regulation, using expressions such as "the infamous 'straight banana' ruling". Some sources have claimed this to be an admission that the original regulations did indeed ban "bent bananas", or that it was accepted that it was "a farce".
Re: (Score:2)
I'n not sure what you think you've found there.
Presumably you think this somehow contradicts what I said. Well, it might, but almost certainly doesn't.
The regulation in question has as one of its first paragraphs:"These provisions state that fruit and vegetables which are intended to be sold fresh to the consumer, may only be marketed if they are sound, fair and of marketable quality and if the country of origin is indicated. In the interest of harmonisation of the implementation of this provision, it is ap
Re: (Score:2)
By marketed, the regulation means 'sold'. You can see this because the alternative to being marketed is 'to throw these products away or destroy them'.
I.e. when the regulation was in place producers had to throw away or destroy fruits and vegetables that didn't meet the standard.
It's a typical EU common agricultural policy rule that is designed to limit supply of agricultural stuff to push up prices. In this case even the EU decided that it was morally pretty hard to defend and scrapped the regulation.
But i
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/ne... [telegraph.co.uk]
A majority of EU member states, including Britain and Ireland, have voted to reform rules like EC Commission Regulation No 2257/94, which caused international ridicule by stating that all bananas must be "free of abnormal curvature" and at least 14 cm in length.
Imperfectly-shaped fruit and vegetables may now be back on supermarket shelves by 2009.
France, Italy, Spain and Greece opposed the reforms and were accused by officials of unfairly seeking to protect the interests of their farmers.
Mariann Fischer Boel, the European agriculture commissioner, has said that she also wants to scrap a swathe of regulations on produce such as onions, garlic, caulifower and spinach.
Speaking before the vote she said the rules were outdated and especially inappropriate at the time of a world food shortages.
She said: "In this era of high prices and growing demand, it makes no sense to throw (misshapen fruit and vegetables) away or destroy them. It shouldn't be the EU's job to regulate these things."
Under the present regulations, Class 1 cucumbers must be "practically straight" and be bent by a gradient of no more than 1/10.
Produce that does not meet the minimum standards can not at present be sold as second-class, meaning many edible items are thrown away by farmers.
So France, Italy, Spain and Greece wanted the rules which artificially limited the supply of bananas and pushed up the price. The UK and Ireland - places where its too cold to grow bananas and which import them didn't want them. Still it took from 1995 to 2009 to get rid of the rule.
Still it's clear the EU has a lot of rules which are designed to benefit EU producers at the cost to EU consumers and to shield those producers from foreign competitors.
Re: (Score:2)
Whilst I am generally in favour of the principle of the EU, and would much rather the UK remain part of it, I am one of the first to admit that it is not a perfect institution, and it certainly doesn't always rule as I would wish. I also tend to think that "ever closer union" is not necessarily a good thing, especially when considering the pace of change in relation to 'social inertia', and with consideration for global economics and the wider geopolitical environment.
That being said, I find that discussion
Re: (Score:1)
They're talking federated system architectures, not government.
There is no centralized authority, each system is autonomous and interacts with other systems based upon agreed standards/exchanges.
That's peer to peer, not federated (Score:2)
> There is no centralized authority, each system is autonomous and interacts with other systems based upon agreed standards/exchanges.
That's called peer to peer.
Here's the diagram of the federated architecture reference model. Note the MA authority:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
IIRC the original use was the Roman dominated "Federati", which in practice meant allies or associates, but where the policy came from Rome. These were groups that Rome didn't actually conqueror for one reason or another, but dominated. Mainly there were Germanics, but that seems to have been "that's where the situation developed". They were nominally independent of Rome, and would meet together in councils to decide on common policy, when never happened to contradict Roman policy (though they could be q
Interesting, thanks (Score:2)
Thanks for that.
I see the connection there. They had been operating independently, and were *allowed* a degree of autonomy in local issues, but ultimately under the authority of Rome regarding foreign affairs etc. That matches up both with the states who formed a federal government and with IT systems and database usage, where each part is to some degree independent insofar as its internal operation, but disciplined by the central authority in matters of relations with other entities (interstate commerce cl
Re: (Score:1)
I love Rick and Morty, so I'll give this simplification:
"Isn't that just copyright violation with fewer steps?" :-D
Re: (Score:2)
And wouldn't that just be "pirate bay"?
I'm in... (Score:2)
I have hosted popular podcasts and have had videos into the high 100,000s of views. Been thinking it might be time to do a new one after a couple of years off.
I'm in! Registering now....
Re: I'm in... (Score:5, Insightful)
Child porn would have millions of views...
Re: (Score:3)
So...the remainder would come from a pizza shop in D.C.?
[ducks]
Strat :)
Re: (Score:2)
the only reason you would want that or would want to hang out there is obviously because you are a pedophile.
That's the fatal flaw in your argument.
prior art (Score:1)
Those guys are going to raise millions for yet another fail to deliver crownfunding scam. But a decentralized, censoship resistant youtube alternative???
This exists already, it's called dtube.
https://d.tube/ [d.tube]
You can even get paid for uploading content to it today.
https://steemit.com/trending/d... [steemit.com]
So why bother to contribute to a kickstarter for yet another one?
Re: (Score:1)
D.Tube is not distributed as a platform, it's still a centralised venue, only the distribution of the content is using "distributed" technology ... if the owner of the website d.tube close it it's all gone...
PeerTube is a distributed platform made of nodes communicating through a protocol, like email servers do. if a certain node/server close, it's video are taken down but not the whole network... you can host your own, and profit from the federation and at some point peer distribution among other nodes too
youtube-dl, mpv, smplayer (Score:1)
It's so simple.
youtube-dl is powerful and elegant. Teamed up with mpv or smplayer and it's all gravy.
HTML5? (Score:1)
Nowadays you can embed videos into your site with a single tag and that's a lot more decentralized than relying on a single piece of software that may or may not be developed.
Re: (Score:3)
Get a million views at once, maybe. Get a million views over x time? Who cares.
Sites should absolutely just provide torrent links for their shit.
Re: (Score:2)
Um, what?
Where do you think the video that is referenced by the tag is going to come from?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The same place the HTML/JS/CSS and images come from. It's just another asset.
Dude are you trolling me? If so, great job because you had me riled up my entire drive home.
HTML5 provides a video playback mechanism? The method of playing the video is completely irrelevant to the technical challenge here. The issue storage and bandwidth.
Do you think replicating Youtube is just about as easy as plunking the video onto whatever website you want? Do you have any idea what sort of resources it takes to host petabytes of video and have the capacity to stream HD or 4k video to hundreds of thou
Re: (Score:2)
This is my thinking. Who pays for all this? It's a question I ask of any decentralized service. Also another thing that seems messy, usernames.
Re: (Score:2)
Who pays for all this? It's a question I ask of any decentralized service.
The peers pay for it. You pay for it. You pay for it through your ISP bill and the storage space and electricity to run your computer.
Re:Video hosting? (Score:5, Informative)
Anybody can host videos with a free or cheap web site
Go ahead and link the free or cheap website where I can host hundreds of gigabytes of 4k content. Make sure the site has the capability to stream that video in 4k to hundreds of thousands of people simultaneously.
[a href="blah.mp4"]blah video[/a]. I don't understand why this project exists, except that perhaps some (many) people simply don't understand how the web works.
Lump yourself into that group.
This isn't about the video player frontend. Obviously there are unlimited choices for playing a video. It's about providing a distributed *backend* (hosting) to store the video data. Which in spite of your claim above is a technically challenging expensive endeavor.
4k content isn't what's in danger at youtube (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Eventually these channels will get enough traction to be noticed and shut down.
Yeah, that never happens. The only reason videos get removed is for copyright or sexist, racist content. Nothing has ever been taken down for having a controversial political slant.
Already smaller channels who tried to push a pro-worker narrative and agenda found themselves de-monitized
De-monetized != censored. De-monetized videos are still accessible in all the same ways as monetized videos.
I think you could use a lesson in Youtube's revenue model. Big companies pay Youtube to advertise their products with Youtube content. If those companies say they don't want their products advertised with political, etc. co
Re: (Score:2)
You can do it cheaply by basically having a web-app front-end to a torrent and the app streams the data from the torrent.
Yes, you just restated exactly what's talked about in TFA.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not about the bandwidth. Bittorrent solves that. It's about revenue.
Look at the guys who went on the recent "day of action" free speech march. Carl Benjamin, aka Sargon, has a monetized YouTube channel with 800k subscribers and a Patreon that nets him over $8,000/month. And he complains that he is being "censored" because he keeps getting banned from Twitter for breaking their very permissive rules, which just earns him the freeze peach martyr achievement and unlocks more revenue.
He might post some stu
4K on Pouët (Score:2)
"4K"? I guess you'll have to ask Pouët where they get the bandwidth to host 4096 byte videos [pouet.net].
Re: (Score:1)
So... (Score:2)
If you’re at a university, and if you’ve got student workers in your IT group, you might want to keep an eye out for any unexplained VMs which might appear.
NOPE! (Score:2)
Sesta DMCA and plenty of other laws will run everyone off of the platform once the inevitable legal issues arise.
It will be relegated to a dark place on the web with a bed reputation where law enforcement will take YOU to jail for accidentally hosting something they don't like.
Good luck explaining the problem to a jury in such a way that they will not think you are up to no good. We have long since forgotten the principles of innocent until proven guilty and have fallen back to the old day of guilty until
Re: (Score:2)
And you are now a monument to my post.
Sesta is not only about children, or are you dumb enough to think adults cannot be trafficked?
I also brought up DMCA, and even mentioned "other laws" like them. I also brought up people "being consider guilty until proven innocent" which you just participated in.
You appear to be part and parcel of what is wrong with people these days. More than willing to commit libel without any thought to what could happen to you if someone tried to do anything about it.
https://www. [unilad.co.uk]
What could possibly go wrong? (Score:3)
This will in no way become just a front end for torrent sites. Nah. :D
It's interesting from the standpoint of disseminating information people want to give out freely and not be at the mercy of a centralized server, but typically the altruistic part will get dwarfed by the pirates pr0n.
The lack of monetization will keep both very high quality original content away from it as well as bottom-feeder clickbait and top ten lists.
Speaking as someone who makes part of his living off of YouTube, it doesn't really hold an interest for me, but if I was not concerned with monetizing my videos directly, it sounds interesting.
It is just so ripe for abuse that it will be interesting to see if legitimate players can even function in that environment. But if one of the 'instances' they speak of can be moderated, people could exist within the instance relatively harmoniously.
Re: (Score:2)
This will in no way become just a front end for torrent sites. Nah.
What do you think Youtube is?
Stallions (Score:1)
Really looking forward to this. (Score:2)
...?
It's not decentralized (Score:3)
If this is "decentralized YouTube" then SVN and CVS are "decentralized version control". Every time people slap the word "decentralized" something (hi Diaspora [wikipedia.org]) they mean something akin to sharding systems common to an MMO where you choose a server to play on and can only interact with other characters on that server -- which was done for performance reasons.
Git, on the other hand, is truly decentralized. No one's repo is more central than anyone else's by design. Doing social media this way is completely possible, but no one's done it yet...;)
Re: It's not decentralized (Score:1)
Awful language choice. (Score:3)
I think we can all agree that a Javascript variant is not something that should be used to make a server and yet, this is exactly what they used to write a server.
Re: also awful name choice (Score:1)
It's also an awful name choice, unless they're hoping to be the go-to choice for "water-sports" enthusiasts.
YouPeer would have been worse though, so at least there's that.
The similarities to BitChute are relevant (Score:2)
BitChute uses a torrent-like distributed peer hosting mechanism to help with scalability.
It doesn't work great, even though I really want BitChute to succeed. Sadly, too many videos just stop streaming and you're left waiting an eternity for it to buffer.