I think this decentralization and federation is what web3 is all about, without all the corporations calling everything to do with monkey pixel art that costs a million dollars "web3"

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] anders@rytter.me 1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

@kiriakos @fubo One thing I think a platform like #Peertube needs to solve, which #LBRY does (because it uses a blockchain) is the financial incentive for content creators without ads because right now you can't really make money on Peertube. On LBRY you can because it features its own currency and on #Youtube of course but this is using ads. This is one of the advantages to using a blockchain. However LBRY's torrent like protocol for sharing video data is very slow and buggy which incentives the centralisation around odysee. The idea behind the project is great but not that well in practice if they don't make the protocol faster.

[–] lucien@beehaw.org 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Plenty of creators have solved that already through platforms like patreon. It turns out that ad-supported content only works if advertisers want to advertise on your content, and large segments of media aren't "advertiser friendly".

No crypto required.

[–] fubo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"Crypto" has meant "encryption" since the early days of PGP.

If you mean "cryptocurrency" or "blockchain", please consider using those specific words.

[–] lucien@beehaw.org 7 points 1 year ago

Kinda being pedantic. It's a comment on a post about web3, responding to someone talking about a blockchain currency. Frankly, unless it's unclear enough that someone might come along and ask "what does cryptography have to do with blockchain?", I'm not sure why you feel the need to correct my usage of the word.

[–] anders@rytter.me 2 points 1 year ago

@lucien
Really? Just heard someone who complained about it but maybe you're right.

[–] fubo@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It's not clear to me that media distribution and payment need to follow the same channels.

For instance, classic TV uses completely separate pathways for distributing media to users (via broadcast radio signals) and collecting revenues. Commercial TV stations run advertisements; US-style public TV stations attract contributors and sponsors; UK BBC-style public TV stations have government funding.

(And the BBC produces good material — not only BBC World Service, but also Doctor Who.)

Platforms such as YouTube collapse all of this into a single service for convenience. And then "YouTubers" get the mistaken impression that they're entitled to it, and fuss when they are "demonetized".

("Demonetization" just means "the platform doesn't think its advertisers want to be associated with you; and the advertisers are paying to have the platform make that decision.")

[–] anders@rytter.me 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@fubo yeah that's true but why not improve things. making it more convenient is better IMO and we have the technologies to do it.

[–] fubo@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If someone is providing convenience as a service, they get to collect a share of revenue from it, and they get to decide whether you get to use their service at all — an opportunity for censorship.

If I were in the video business (which I'm not; so I am ignorant!) I would look to distribute video via a service similar to a streaming/dynamic version of BitTorrent; and find a way to automate placement of video ads into the stream. Major tech companies shouldn't need to be involved at all; nothing about this should need large server or network capacity — for the same reason that torrent servers don't.

[–] anders@rytter.me 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@fubo thats where i think crypto is great such as how LBRY does it. you can earn money and no one has the power to demonetize you.

[–] fubo@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If it becomes popular, what prevents the goat porn people from spamming it and making good content undiscoverable?

[–] anders@rytter.me 2 points 1 year ago

@fubo
Same as Fediverse. Instances can choose to hide certain content.

[–] Mustafa_Kulle@mastodon.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@anders

As much as I like the idea of creating an incentive to make money by making videos, it's not good in practice. Youtube's quality has plummeted ever since it introduced adverts, content creators keep making videos with non content for the sake of it, on top of that, desperate sponsorships, which is irritating.

#Odysee uses blockchain but it is still in its infancy. It needs more time and money to be invested in it in order to grow. Right now there is no proper way to buy LBC credits.

[–] anders@rytter.me 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@Mustafa_Kulle
True. Trading LBC could maybe be made more easy. As far as I know you have to buy or sell them on crypto exchanges at the moment which can be complicated for some.

[–] Mustafa_Kulle@mastodon.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@anders

Yes. That is exactly the problem.
When I want to boost content on #Odysee I simply want to go to a credits page, buy them using a debit/ credit card and boost it.

At the moment, when you go to their FAQ pages, you will find there is no straight forward method to buy LBRY credits to boost your content. Which is annoying.

https://help.odysee.tv/category-wallet/balances/#lbc-boosting-content

I'm hoping it will get there someday. All we need is #patience

[–] anders@rytter.me 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@Mustafa_Kulle
Indeed. Hopefully they will improve. Or someone else will do it better in the future.

[–] Mustafa_Kulle@mastodon.social 1 points 1 year ago

@anders

Hell yeah. Whoever that "someone else" may be, I am definitely willing to give it a try.

#New #Tech is worth #fighting for. \m/