My (probably naive) prediction:

[wuzzy@cyberplace.social]

My (probably naive) prediction:

The first #video website that bans #clickbait, #ragebait, #AI slop and #ads will replace #YouTube.

#Internet #web

[oblomov@sociale.network]

@Wuzzy very naive. How would it support itself?

[bovaz@misskey.social]

@oblomov@sociale.network @Wuzzy@cyberplace.social spitballing here, but the first question that came to me is: why is posting videos free? As the videomaker, you already spent time and probably money making the video, so paying a bit for posting it wouldn't necessarily make a lot of difference. Kind of like putting your game on steam, or most of the other storefronts. This would filter out some automated spam things, maybe. However, it would also filter out some independent creator. So, I don't know.
Then you as a videomaker should be free to pick ads you want and put them when you want in the video. The default should be no ads, because that's better for the users, and because for the video platform to pay you you'd have to provide additional info. This setting should be reviewed periodically, because ads change.

[wuzzy@cyberplace.social]

@oblomov idk. Admittedly, I am kind of an idealist.

And want to rant about clickbait, AI slop and ads.

[oblomov@sociale.network]

@Wuzzy

> Admittedly, I am kind of an idealist.

It's good to have positive dreams.

> And want to rant about clickbait, AI slop and ads.

oh, please do!

[wuzzy@cyberplace.social]

@bovaz @oblomov I don't claim to have all the answers, but I know enough to know that paywalls are NOT a replacement for moderation.

Just look at X where the paying users also tend to post the most unhinged pro-nazi trash.

The argument for making "posting videos free" is that authors provide the actual value to the site. Without authors, YouTube would crumble to dust.

I am tired of the ideology that says creative ppl need to be THANKFUL to be ALLOWED to present their work.

[wuzzy@cyberplace.social]

@oblomov Ok, there's ONE possibility that comes to mind: Donations. Several websites do it. Wikipedia is one example (not for videos of course).

But I guess it depends on a case-by-case basis on how big you can grow w/ only donations.

There might be other ways, too, idk.

[oblomov@sociale.network]

@Wuzzy I'm not saying it can't be done. There are PeerTube instances after all. The question is more a matter of scale vs ease of use (which is crucial for widespread adoption to the point of being able to say «it has replaced YT»). And video storage + bandwidth on replay is magnitudes higher than text 8-(

[bovaz@misskey.social]

@Wuzzy@cyberplace.social @oblomov@sociale.network my point wasn't "creators should be thankful". And I agree that moderation could be better than paywalls.
I was thinking in terms of "how would a video platform sustain itself without needing ads"? The steam model is not perfect, but the idea there is "you put some money up front, and get it back through your sales". And I don't see it working for any and all videos, but perhaps some long form thing.

[vinicius_py2vmh@mastodon.social]

@oblomov @Wuzzy Video storage is very expensive. 10mins of reading text is less than a megabyte (much less), 10mins of watching video will be much more depending on the bitrate. Even audio streaming can be very expensive very quickly.