For it to be even remotely usable, it needs a very large userbase to store and distribute the videos, which just isn't going to happen. Nobody wants to use stuff like this when it is barely functional, so it never reaches a stage where it is a viable alternative to other video hosts. It also creates a large problem with content, because less popular stuff is basically unwatchable if the userbase is too small. Even YouTube would have a ton of issues if they shifted to decentralised hosting.
I imagine its a legal quagmire, which is probably part of the reason it hasn't been pursued by larger companies.
For it to be even remotely usable, it needs a very large userbase to store and distribute the videos, which just isn't going to happen. Nobody wants to use stuff like this when it is barely functional, so it never reaches a stage where it is a viable alternative to other video hosts. It also creates a large problem with content, because less popular stuff is basically unwatchable if the userbase is too small. Even YouTube would have a ton of issues if they shifted to decentralised hosting.
I imagine its a legal quagmire, which is probably part of the reason it hasn't been pursued by larger companies.
I like the idea and intent. @Pmya has talked about a p2p solution for video hosting.
But I'm a skeptic.
It took me 4 minutes to watch the 2 minute introduction video. I would assume they can improve on that, but there will always be limitations due to flaky peers and connections.
If they can solve that, this could be a game changer, but unless it can become stable and reliable, I don't think it will dislodge the near monopoly that youtube has.