Comment on Facepalm

• SnipingNinja@slrpnk.net ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

  Storage isn’t the only cost, or even the major cost, it’s bandwidth to serve them

  I don’t see a better way for YouTube to be managed in the current environment, but I do agree it’s not the best possible way; it’s just the ideal way is limited to an ideal world, which we don’t have.

  source

  • wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

    That can be a shared expense, but bandwidth is variable and storage space isn’t, so I imagine yt would charge by the MB for uploads but do a simplified floating split cost for bandwidth. Again, not everyone should be able to blast the internet with their (tbh) shitty unboxing, multiplayer raging, prank/harassment, 8 second meme, etc videos.

    Everyone knew - or should have known - that yt was a money pit. I was happy that the og devs got bought out, but the writing was on the wall back then. The fact that g let it sit for so long before trying to recoup some funds for it is one reason why everyone is so pissy about the whole paying vs ads debate - it was free and non-intrusive for so long, the fuck do they need to fix it now?

    So yeah, my idea is shitty for the people who aren’t able to bankroll their video startup career, but if you just open yt and take in what kind of ‘content’ is being created and shoveled… The fact that they haven’t at least pitched the idea is an active disservice to the internet as a whole. I don’t think it would be so bad, short-term pain for long-term (theoretical) sustainability.

    source