Of course i’m not saying internet users have to use it. Or that it has to completely replace Youtube or other streaming services in its complete entirety.
Here is why internet users should start using Peertube, no matter how much or less they use it than Youtube. Simply letting them know it exists is key.
Peertube is essentially an interface with a varying amount of instanced hosted by volunteers that all build up the bigger Peertube federated service with all the videos. Unlike alternatives.
it has the highest chance of other all other video user generated content services being around for years to come due to being federated. If Youtube shuts down good bye to alot of that years worth of content. If a peertube instance closes dont only a smaller portion of video would be lost, but that doesn’t close down the entire program because all the other instances in theory would still be feferated.
It’s open source meaning less likely hood of seeing ads on or by videos. Donation are always encouraged to help fund the servers. But not required.
Summary:
-
longer lasting due to being federated potentials even with less profits
-
Peertube is open source.
-
Donations are welcome but not required just to use the service.
From what I understand, there is an option to run transcoding servers standalone. So a single gen 5 pcie motherboard could run two alveo ma35d encoder cards and plow through a ton of encodes simultaneously. It wouldn’t be cheap of course, but in terms of running a media server hosting video, it is not impossible. This is the kind of thing in which groups of people working together would be more financially viable than separate.
Interesting and neat to know.
Both solutions (monolithic and federated) have their pro and cons.
Feel like the ownership vs money aspect is the biggest deciding factor.
(and backups)