A comment from @disrooter from another thread;https://lemmy.ml/post/57418/comment/42932
"As someone who managed a PeerTube instance for a large YouTube channel I have to say the big problem is storage: how are you going to pay for storage that increases with each new video while the income is mostly the same? From a business point of view it’s a suicide.
Keep in mind content creators on YouTube produce many gigabytes/week. In a few years they would have to pay hundreds of dollars each week, even when they pause and not producing any new video, when they are getting less donations and so on.
Why should they invest so much money in a PeerTube instance? Only a premium pay-to-view service can justify it and you really need a high cost-to-produce-and-stream-the-video/minutes-of-video ratio to make it convenient, for example documentaries and not lazy records of hours of online debates." -end quote
This means that if avid content creators wants to host a peertube instance, they will be held back from doing it, because of how expensive it will be.
Just wanna talk about this issue, it deserves It’s own post. let me know what you think.
You would need to look into economic and business models of decentralized platforms to find out what would best fit for peertube. If YouTube’s business model is based on their ability to collect data from users in a centralized space and sell that in the form of advertising, to mimic that model you would need a system to distribute revenue in a decentralized way. Similar to an electric smart grid, think of data flows in the same way and power flows. I can’t think of a model besides that that would allow decentralized video to scale to the level of Youtube. Maybe a platform co-op model where everyone pays a subscription to maintain the servers, and to incentivize creators a pool of revenue is distributed based on view counts, while still allowing for donation buttons on user pages.
deleted by creator