Hi, my post is focusing specifically on YouTube since I observed the following categories have less intrusive solutions or privacy focused solutions, even if they are paid:

  • Operating Systems (Linux, for example)
  • Instant Messaging (Element, for example)
  • Community Messaging (Revolt, for example)
  • E-Mail (Proton, for example)
  • Office (libreoffice, for example)
  • Password Managers (Bitwarden, for example)

However, how do we distribute videos and watch them without data collection? I am NOT asking how do I use a privacy-focused front-end for YouTube, by the way, I am aware they exist.

I am wondering how we obtain a FOSS solution to something super critical such as YouTube. It is critical since it contains a lot of educational content (I’d wager more than any other platform), and arguably the most informative platform, despite having to filter through a lot of trash. During COVID, we even saw lecturers from universities upload their content on YouTube and telling students to watch those lectures. (I have first-hand experience with this at a respectable university).

I refuse to accept that there is nothing we can do about it.

  • DavidGarcia@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    The technology mostly exists. The most important question is always how do you get people to use it.

    The only way I see people using decentralized solutions is by having one interface where you can watch decentralized content as well as YouTube. That way they don’t loose any of the content or convenience.

    No one ever bothers to open up two apps for videos, that is why a single app solution is the only way.

    The unique selling point of decentralized video plattforms atm is 1) you can watch what is banned on YouTube 2) you are not beholden to the YouTube algorithm for conent.

    So if we can sell that to users and not have them loose any convenience or UX, you can slowly start replacing YouTube.

    Monetization is also an important point, but others have addressed this.

    • Matt@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      If they integrate some self-hosted analytics and monetization mechanics, like Matomo and Stripe, to it, then it’ll be a feasible alternative to YouTube.

  • makeasnek@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    The key problem that needs to be solved is the monetization problem. Nostr has a potential solution though. Over the last two months alone, their users have “zapped” (tipped/donated) other users around 950K (nearly 1 mil!) USD worth via lightning and that number continues to grow. And it doesn’t just make it easy to pay content creators, but to also put a portion of your “zaps” towards the relay you use or development of the software if you want. If you have a nostr account, you can easily tie it to a lightning address to send/receive tips, nostr doesn’t take a fee. Relays can also portion out a bit of their zaps for the people who publish the most engaging content on their relay. The possibilities are quite extensive. And because it’s over lightning, zaps happen instantly and for pennies or less in fees. Though, you can use nostr without zaps at all.

    For those unfamiliar with nostr, it’s a decentralized social media software much like ActivityPub/mastodon, the main use right now is as a twitter/instagram clone but there’s also a reddit-style section being built up as well. Video hosting itself could be done by relays or through a P2P system similar to IPFS. Moderation abilities from the perspective of the instance/relay are identical to activitypub/mastodon. But one bonus if that if your relay goes down, you don’t lose your identity, since your identity and relay are separate. And if you change apps or relays (you are typically connected to multiple relays), all your content moves with you seamlessly. And the payment/zap infrastructure is all decentralized, relays don’t ever custody or manage the payments. If you tip a content creator, it goes directly from you to them. The lightning network has basically limitless transaction capacity. If you have cash app, it supports lightning, so you can already send zaps (you will need different apps to receive zaps though because cash app doesn’t support the LNURL standard). Strike natively supports it. And because it’s lightning, it works in every country automatically.

    Long-term, if I am a content creator, which “fedi”-type system is going to be attractive to me? One where users can send me tips and mircopayments or one where they can’t? This is why I think nostr is going to win out long-term over AP/Mastodon. Mastodon could add this kind of functionality but I don’t get the impression they’re open to it. People may not want to commit to yet another $5/month subscription to a YouTuber’s patreon or nebula or whatever, but they are happy to tip 1-10c after watching a video. So there’s a psychological beauty to micropayments as well. As some random person I have made like 7c on tips this month, but I’ve also given out plenty to other people.

    Source about nostr fees: https://lemmy.ml/post/17824358

    • smnwcj@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Unfortunately this financing requires a populace widely adopting cryptocurrency…making it a pipe dream for mainstream use.

      Tips are generally a bad model as well, which creates an incentive for rapid and pandering work (like ad supported content).

      Patreon had frankly built all of YouTube that is worth watching. I think a simple payment system using real banks can be integrated into smaller hosting services.

      It’s all academic though, YouTube is unrivaled in ad revenue and helping you expand an audience.

      • makeasnek@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        25% of Americans own crypto, usage continues to grow year after year both domestically and internationally. Most people have a crypto-capable wallet on their phone (CashApp, Venmo, Paypal). It solves problems traditional financial systems can’t solve well. That’s a trend that has been happening for 15 years.

        • beeng@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          People want something (YouTube but not YouTube) but don’t want to learn new techniques and technology (crypto). Eventually you have to leave them behind.

          I didn’t know about this Nostr, but I do believe you’re right with the content Creator coming for the money, it’s always the money.

          I’m going to give it a go!

  • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Torrents solved this problem (big data distribution) over 20 years ago now, and is still a sizeable chunk of all internet media traffic.

    All that’s needed is for people to actually create torrents for their content, and a user friendly way for people to post and view magnet links.

    I’m trying to integrate them into lemmy in various ways: https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/issues/4204

    • Elise@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I appreciate your work. I’m thinking it should be easy to reach out to non tech content creators to get permission to migrate their stuff, and for end users like me to request that without a technical barrier. For example: I was watching a self defense channel throughout the week until the youpocalypse happened. What if there is a simple button for me to request his data to be integrated into your system? I’m pretty sure he is more focused on exposure and reach rather than ad revenue, so he might consent. You interpret this to be consent to ytdl it, store it, spread it.

      • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Sure, a lot of people do even have entire youtube playlists and channels shared on torrents without their consent even, downloaded with youtube-dl. Getting existing content onto torrents should be pretty easy.

        We do need to get these content creators to create and seed their own torrents also tho, rather than have everyone else do it on their behalf, then post their own torrent links so others can help seed.

        The only clean way I see this happening is some kind of a tool that simplifies this, or a readme that can help with the process, possibly linked to lemmy’s post creation as a video/audio upload button, and on any other platform that supports magnet links.

        If anyone knows of something like that already, it’d be really helpful.

          • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            I’ve never used it personally, so I don’t know.

            Torrents link to static data, each with their own explicit seeders, so that always seemed more safe than these universal file-system solutions where you don’t know what might be changing, or what you’re hosting.

            • Elise@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              I only quickly looked into it. I’m also looking for a solution for my work. It seems very privacy focused and works a bit like tor, so like you say, you don’t really know what’s going through your system. But it also has a trust system that trusts friends of friends and so on, so perhaps that isn’t a problem.

  • DARbarian@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Pray that Google enshittifies YouTube enough for any amount of creators to migrate to Peertube

    • jqubed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      The big problem is there are a lot of good creators who are only able to be good creators in large part because of the YouTube ad revenue they get. They would otherwise have to work normal jobs and not be able to devote the time or resources to their videos. I have little faith that enough viewers would actually pay enough money to offset the ad revenue that supports many creators. Without a way to realistically replace that financial stream there is a large chunk of YouTube that can’t migrate. Of course, that’s no loss with some of the content mills churning out crap to try and cash in on the revenue, but I’ve seen plenty of good stuff that I’m not sure would exist another way.

  • TheImpressiveX@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’m not sure if you can replace YouTube. It’s too popular and has been a mainstay of the Internet for 19 years. We won’t be able to convince people to just up and leave YouTube.

    Best case scenario is to lead by example and start sharing videos from PeerTube.

    • monobot@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Not only that, I am certain Google will put as much money as needed into it not to allow any competing platform.

      YT is not profitable, but gives them data, power and control.

      • ddh@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Twitter’s different IMO. It relies on the network effect, whereas YouTubers get paid.

        • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          were not talkin about the small number of creators. its all about the audience . though i see what youre sayin… chicken and egg kind of thing… its ok, google is making it hard on them

  • 7uWqKj@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Check out FreeTube to privately watch YouTube videos, and PeerTube for a complete replacement.

  • stoy@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I have thought about creating a video series that is distributed via torrent, that could be a decent idea…

  • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    P2P, and shamelessly rehosting popular content.

    Won’t make those content creators happy… but it’s the best way to get users to show up, which will attract original content creators.

  • ssm@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    If you’re a creator, upload to Peertube and Youtube, and promote Peertube on your Youtube channel. It’s a compromise, but it’s the only realistic way to pull viewers over if you’re not already a popular creator. Also provide some incentives to use Peertube instead of Youtube, like early uploads.

    If you’re a viewer, use Peertube; and when you need to use Youtube, use a 3rd party client like pipe-viewer. Don’t support ad culture, donate to creators you like instead.

    Proton as a private alternative to Gmail

    lol, lmao

    • JustMarkov@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      lol, lmao

      I assume you don’t understand how law and authorities work, if this is funny for you. Proton is still one of the best private email providers. Period.

      • ssm@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Oh I understand it, and I also understand that laws can be wrong and corrupt, and shouldn’t always be followed. If you think how law-abiding a corporation is is more important than protecting privacy of activists, maybe that shows your true colors.

          • ssm@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Good point! Trusting law-abiding corporations to protect your privacy is fundamentally a bad idea, and as such, promoting Proton as a private alternative to Google (compared to say, self hosting on a bulletproof VPS like buyvm) is harming users and promoting corporate propaganda.

            • JustMarkov@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              Trusting law-abiding corporations to protect your privacy is fundamentally a bad idea, and as such, promoting Proton as a private alternative to Google

              You can’t trust anyone, that’s true. But self-hosting your own 100% bulletproof MailCow server on 1984 VPS, which you pay for in Monero won’t make you any more private, because emails you send still end up on Gmail inboxes.
              It’s simply unneccesary for normal user with not so high threat model. And if you’re a political activist, then why even using email instead of normal privacy communication solutions like SimpleX, Session or Briar?

              • ssm@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                But self-hosting your own 100% bulletproof MailCow server on 1984 VPS, which you pay for in Monero won’t make you any more private, because emails you send still end up on Gmail inboxes.

                How does sending mail to gmail affect my privacy? If I’m sending encrypted mail to gmail, only that one mail is compromised once decrypted on gmail’s servers. Any mail sent to any other server is fine. Do you only send mail to gmail users or something?

                It’s simply unneccesary for normal user with not so high threat model. And if you’re a political activist, then why even using email instead of normal privacy communication solutions like SimpleX, Session or Matrix?

                smtp is no better or worse than xmpp, irc or whatever else if you have end to end encryption. Proton decided to lie in their privacy policy that they don’t log IPs, which ended up fucking this activist because they started logging after a sneaky targeted court order, and then edited their privacy policy after the fact like the shitty little rats they are.

                • JustMarkov@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  If I’m sending encrypted mail to gmail, only that one mail is compromised once decrypted on gmail’s servers.

                  What? How? Most private email providers only support encryption like Proton to Proton or Tuta to Tuta. Emails sended to anything else stay unencrypted. And there’s no way you’re going to use this stupid password protection everytime, because if you do, then why would you even use email?

                  Do you only send mail to gmail users or something?

                  Almost everyone uses Gmail, Outlook, Yahoo or whatever. Unfortunately, not everyone are privacy concious like you and me.

                  smtp is no better or worse than xmpp, irc or whatever else if you have end to end encryption.

                  No, it’s not. Emails should not be used by political activists to communicate. Even the best email providers like Proton or Tuta can’t give you 100% protection and this activist arrest is the perfect example.
                  Email is the obsolete protocol, that should only be used to register on random websites and get authorization codes. For everything else you should use secure messaging apps.

  • monobot@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I don’t have solution for videos, but I am moving back to podcasts and rss as much as possible. I want to be ready when they finally forbbid watching without ads.

    But I must admit content creators are not helping, content for most of them become just job to be done with. I am aware it is not their fault and that yt is pushing them, but content is geting worse.

    It is hard to compete with platform that is loosing so much money. They will also buy anyone who tries. Maybe if we start being satisfied with one resolution and quality, but that will never happen.

  • katy ✨@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    you offer content creators a better revenue share to make content for the new service while offering the same level of stability. there’s a reason why nobody has done it.

    • toastal@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      …Agreed & real weird to see a specific client mentioned instead of a protocol.

  • 🦊 OneRedFox 🦊@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Video hosting/streaming is the hardest use-case to replace due to infrastructure costs. PeerTube exists, which works like torrents and is probably the best solution that we’re gonna get for this. I don’t see it replacing YouTube though, since decentralization fundamentally limits reach (and potential income as a result) and a lack of data collection makes it harder to accurately profile viewers (both of which professional content creators care about). It’s probably fine for hobbyists and FOSS projects that want to distribute videos though.

  • banazir@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I refuse to accept that there is nothing we can do about it.

    I don’t think you quite understand just how stupendous the amount of data Google processes from YouTube alone is. There is basically no way for hobbyists to provide an equivalent service. Very few companies have those kinds of resources. If you want, you can of course try running a PeerTube instance, but you rather quickly run in to problems with scaling.

    I find it almost miraculous YouTube exists to begin with. It is no accident Google has very few competitors on that front, and I don’t think YouTube is even profitable for them. Without Google’s deep pockets and interest in monopolizing the market, YouTube would have withered a long time ago.

    Trust me, I want a solution too. But 500 hours of content are uploaded to YouTube every minute. All of that is processed, re-encoded, and saved with multiple bitrates. You can’t compete with that. YouTube might eventually keel over from Enshittification and its own impossibility, but replacing it with anything meaningful will be a challenge.

    • cobysev@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      […] I don’t think YouTube is even profitable for them.

      Correct. Even Google, one of the richest companies in the world, is struggling to afford the massive infrastructure required to run YouTube. That’s why they’ve been cracking down on ad-blocking software lately.

      Also, this is likely why they’ve been pushing their new updated Chromium-based infrastructure for web browsers, which will prevent ad-blockers from working on websites. If you’re not using Firefox or Safari to browse the Internet by now, you should switch. They’re the only independent browsers not using the Chromium framework.

      • Mihies@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        I’d even buy subscription if it was a family one without music bundled for a reasonable price. No such luck in my country.

      • Snapz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Restaurants don’t take steaks off the menu because they aren’t are profitable as salads. One date wants a salad, the other wants steak, they make less profit on the steak plate, but the average of the two is profit enough.

        It’s ridiculous to look at any one service of these behemoth monopolies as an island - They are one collective thought, EVERY SINGLE PIECE does not have to be to enshittified to generate the biggest possible profit.

    • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Counter-point : every single one of the videos uploaded to youtube already lives on the creators hard drive, usually in a much larger format. All that’s needed is for them to create torrents for them.

      • mrpants@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        I think the largest challenge though is maintaining the distribution and managing the associated upfront costs.

        Existing large content producers could likely afford to handle this but new producers could struggle paying to seed their content.

        Though I do think overall this is more achievable than people give it credit for:

        • YT videos don’t need huge bandwidth for a sustained period; only for short bursts. Most views come in within a week.
        • Content is probably localized to specific countries. Less need to replicate across the globe.
        • Let the source prefer to seed the highest quality and other peers downsample and replicate as needed.
        • Doesn’t need YT scale. Tons of YT “content” is spammers leeching essentially free hosting from YT. No one needs to seed their videos if they don’t want to.
        • 1080p is still fine for YT videos. h265 is very efficient (though downsampling 265 isn’t great). Don’t need 4k for most videos.
    • people_are_cute@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I’d have agreed but hundreds of fmovies and similar sites exist on the high seas that provide free streaming of millions of HD content (movies, web series, etc.) somehow. They use some third-party video host that is magically able to concurrently serve millions of people.

      • Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Maybe the solution to YouTube is something similar to BitTorrent. It would make more sense for the protocol to preload the first chunk and to use a codec that can start with a lower res image and then fill in the resolution in subsequent passes. And on the front end, something like Lemmy would work, where channels and posts can be federated.

        Considering the number of people who have 1gps symmetric bandwidth today, such a system should be able to technically work.

        But nobody’s designed it yet AFAIK.

      • Ilandar@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Those sites just scrape from many different file hosting sites. They don’t pay for that storage themselves.

      • reddithalation@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        the infrastructure of the pirate streaming sites is impressive, but I bet that is still orders of magnitude easier than hosting youtube.

    • alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      While I do agree with you, I also see twitch, TikTok and Patreon presenting models that are quite competitive with YouTube.

      From a privacy perspective, free junk content like TikTok, YouTube and twitch will always be hard coupled with targeted advertising.

      But Patreon (and onlyfans for that matter) do offer a model that can work without ads.

      In fact, if Patreon also introduced an ad-supported tier and allowed you to more broadly see other content aside from the direct person you sponsor, it could probably grow quite a lot.

      • huginn@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago
        1. Tiktok is a company comparable in scale to Google. 130Bn in revenue last year.

        2. Patreon is nowhere near the scale of YouTube. But I also think it’s the only viable solution to privacy and supporting creators.

  • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Honestly the biggest thing all of us is missing to take it down is financial capital.

    To get the kind of capital you need to take down YouTube, you need investment money from the kind of investors who will force you to enshittify to afford paying them back.

    The financial issue is the biggest one, when it comes to any and all of these.

    • misery mansion@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      There are two YouTubes. One is the “creator” YouTube, algorithms, numbers blah blah

      The other is the actual content creator YouTube. These are the channels that people actually follow. If captain disillusion set up his own RSS feed for videos, and I had the method to subscribe to it, I’d no longer need YouTube

      The argument that YouTube has the algorithm and recommendations etc is moot, that’s the same job that every network does, you could absolutely replace this

      The video content would have to be self hosted probably. How it used to be. So we need all these tools to eat YouTube’s lunch