▲ | roenxi 4 days ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
It is technically different and there are trade offs, but that isn't much of an argument - at the end of the day we need to send yea many bytes of data from server to client with a known format. I watched a PeerTube video yesterday and it was the same experience as watching a YouTube one. Some company could implement YouTube by running large servers as peers if the unit economics made sense and it'd work. The problem PeerTube has is that there isn't demand for what it is doing because YouTube is a pretty good video custodian. Although everyone seems to be sensibly alert to the risk that they eventually go bad, right now it works. Obviously don't expect any video currently on YouTube to be available in 20 years though. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | bawolff 4 days ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> I watched a PeerTube video yesterday But did you watch it from a site operating at scale? Its easy to be youtube at low scale. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|