This is the latest #youtube "innovation". #Google with a market cap of $1.7 trillion and $120 billion cash on hand, "needs" to charge for ads on YouTube.
This is, of course, not true. They have more than enough revenue to run YouTube without ads in perpetuity, but they want to please shareholders. The #Peertube community is showing how you can distribute the costs of hosting content as well. If you don't support Google's continued monetization of monopolized video...vote with your feet.
@tilvids The problem with foot-voting is that it just makes you miserable.
None of my Twitter community moved over here. I see only one or two posts a day on Lemmy, which rarely have comments. BookWyrm doesn't even have most of the books I'm reading.
I have yet to see one of these open source options be anywhere near as good as the thing it's trying to replace.
@tilvids this is irrational logic.
Company A earns $X.
Therefore company A doesn't need to charge for Y.
See? No link.
In reality, Company A earns $X largely because of ad revenue on platform Y, and pays out creators from said revenue, as well as profiting from it.
So yes, I fully sympathize with any company running 500 petabytes of video storage wanting to retain their passive revenue stream.
If you don't want to give them ad revenue, go watch videos somewhere else.
@tilvids I ignored PeerTube for a while with the reason that most people are on YouTube, and there are ways to watch my content there for privacy conscious people , too.
Now things have changed enough that I finally sent my registration request to TILvids.