More
10

I have made a post with exactly this title in past.
Last time the consensus was "No preference, variety is good".

Since that time I have received messages telling me to stop using YT and post everything with a hooktube link.
And now I've got another person telling me to stop using Hooktube.

So I'd like to hear from anyone that has an opinion one way or the other.

My take is that YT is the worst thing in existence for online creators. By supporting alternatives, we create potential for a brighter the future without a YT monopoly. So I have been using YT for small creators, but Hook for all else.
I agree that the hook player is inferior to the YT player. But if the choice is between shitty player, or shitty company, I'm willing to take a hit on usability.

What do you think?
I have made a post with exactly this title in past. Last time the consensus was "No preference, variety is good". Since that time I have received messages telling me to stop using YT and post everything with a hooktube link. And now I've got another person telling me to stop using Hooktube. So I'd like to hear from anyone that has an opinion one way or the other. My take is that YT is the worst thing in existence for online creators. By supporting alternatives, we create potential for a brighter the future without a YT monopoly. So I have been using YT for small creators, but Hook for all else. I agree that the hook player is inferior to the YT player. But if the choice is between shitty player, or shitty company, I'm willing to take a hit on usability. What do you think?

23 comments

[–] PMYA 2 points (+3|-1) Edited

YouTube clicks result in content creators being paid, hooktube does not.

It's also just nowhere near as good functionality wise.

Edit: this is also kind of on topic - I hate archive links. They fuck up the page formatting and features most of the time and archives get blocked by my mobile ISP. I get that people don't want to give some sites ad money, but that's why I use a fucking ad blocker.
[–] InnocentBystander [OP] 3 points (+3|-0) Edited

That's too simplified of a statement to be accurate.
Some YT clicks come with a pittance for creators. But as long as YT has a monopoly it is the creators that will suffer for it.
I would say that you harm the creators by supporting a monopoly.

Many YT creators would love to leave, but they know that the viewers will not.

So I think you've got the first point backwards, you're not helping creators.
The second point is a good one.

[–] PMYA 1 points (+2|-1)

I do not share your optimism. There's no way someone is going to create a platform where people are paid for creating videos on the same scale as YouTube. It is a miracle that such a thing even exists, in my opinion. If anyone tried to adopt the YouTube model, they would never be able to make the site keep itself afloat, not even anywhere close.
[–] InnocentBystander [OP] 1 points (+1|-0)

Twitch?
What do you see as being a barrier against a start-up?

The tec is pretty straight-forward, the hardware is reasonable. I don't see any reason outside of market factors, that it would be especially difficult.
I run a hobby-site that hosts (non-video) content that sends about 300-400gigs of data transfer per month. That is nothing compared to what video hosting rates would be, but coffee is the largest expense involved with running my site.
Coffee.

I don't have any direct experience/knowledge of video hosting, but I don't see where extra and huge costs would come from.
Advertising income would scale up with a site, and should be able to make it a player.
The reason it doesn't happen, I believe, is the entry-fee, and buy-outs. Those can be overcome when there's a clear demand.
©2016-2022 Phuks LLC. All Rights Reserved.
ToS | Privacy | Changelog | Canary | Donate | Bugs | License
Served by 08495c768707