It was a joke. You can’t seriously think that PeerTube is viable alternative to YT (as a sole distribution channel).

I say this as someone who does use PeerTube for a few content creators that mirror from YT.

The hell does Bloomberg have to do with gaming videos

Are you going to answer my question or just continue replying solely to insult me?

No insults intended. Apologies if it came off that way.

The market share dynamics, UI/UX issues (average person finds federation to be a difficult concept) and lack of an “easy to pick up” monetisation system make PeerTube non-viable as a sole distribution source for a commercial (or even part-time income) channel.

I would argue the market share difference is by the far the biggest factor (other factors can arguably be accounted for with varying degree of success).

(average person finds federation to be a difficult concept)

People thought the same about YouTube at some point.

lack of an “easy to pick up” monetisation system

All the monetization systems are the same, minus one, which is the absolute worst part of the platform anyway.

I would argue the market share difference is by the far the biggest factor

The market share would grow ten thousand fold overnight if Steve moved.

I would support GN opening a PeerTube channel (and I would watch their PeerTube channel), I just don’t think it’s viable to completely move off YT at this point.

Regarding monetisation, we of course will have to radically change internet monetisation models with a bigger focus on scheduled donations (for the platform and content creators) and a perks system for incentives and perhaps a bit torrent-enhanced style distribution system. But this is a long term thing, there is the here and now.

Was it really neccessary to fly there?

I’d be interested to hear your proposals for alternative business models.

Apparently Bloomberg ordered the takedown of a GamersNexus video because they used one of their clips. The video was about the smuggling of GPUs into China, so the assumption is that Bloomberg is actually trying to silence the story.

It’s not an alternative business model. It’s the same business model on an alternative platform.

Then the fact that YT is more popular and the annoying catch-22 continues ever thus.

The video in the post mentions that Blomberg has their own coverage of Nvidia GPUs and the black market which obviously isn’t as detailed and probably gets information wrong and they certainly want to silence this true reporting of the facts.

I don’t know what that has to do with anything. Yes, YouTube is more popular, what good does that do you if you’re banned from it?

If you’re banned, nothing. But until then, YT is where the audience is. That’s why no-one/very few have jumped ship. A creator needs a large audience on a platform to make it worthwhile for them while an audience needs a good selection of creators to make the platform worthwhile to jump to. Until content creators band together to decide on a platform for everyone to jump to, we’re stuck right where we are.

I just don’t think it’s viable to completely move off YT at this point.

And yet you haven’t provided any justification for this position.

Steve has millions of loyal followers. He has channel sponsors. He has his own personal products. He probably has thousands of channel donors.

Would he take a substantial hit to his revenue? Absolutely. But to say its “not viable” is preposterous.

At the very least he could begin mirroring his channel there.

If you’re banned, nothing

We’re not talking about me, we’re talking about Steve.

But until then, YT is where the audience is.

And it’s where the audience will remain until someone does something about it.

A creator needs a large audience on a platform to make it worthwhile for them while an audience

No shit. He already has the audience. He can bring them with him to the new platform.

You’re still just stating a bunch of obvious stuff without providing any explanation why PeerTube isn’t viable.

Why not?

Decent content slop to send their message

That’s my theory… They did a fake investigation and then got cucked.

So now they are big mad

It’s bad for the environment to take uneccessary flights and it sets a bad example.

I don’t usually watch gamers Nexus stuff, I find it to be a bit dense for casual watching. It’s accurate as all hell, as far as I’m concerned… They know their shit and they research the crap out of whatever they’re covering; this both makes them awesome, but adds to the density of their content.

I also have immense respect for them because they’ll call shit out like this, and just give the finger to any possible repercussions. They’re legally in the clear as far as I’m concerned, they’re hyper careful about that kind of thing. But that doesn’t mean that Google is willing to host them while they do shit that makes Google’s advertising partners grumpy; and I assume Bloomberg, or a company affiliated with Bloomberg runs ads on YouTube/Google/whatever.

They’re in a position where they have significant risk, and instead of tucking tail and doing what they’re told, they’re fighting, and pointing out the problem. They’re putting a spotlight on the fact that we all know, but nobody really mentions, that “good business” in the ad space, is to appease your advertisers as much as possible. Like it or not, Google is still, very much, an ad company. That’s how they started, that’s still a big part of the business. It’s why Google search is free. It’s why Gmail is free, and it’s why YouTube is free (almost all of these have paid options, but that’s not the focus right now).

So like it or not, Google’s in a pretty tough spot. I’m sure the views from GN drive some significant ad revenue, at the same time, in certain that the contracts for ads from Bloomberg and affiliates, are worth quite a bit as well. If they kick GN, then they lose ad revenue from any ads that would run on their videos in there future. If they don’t, they risk losing a potentially very valuable advertiser.

They’re stuck in the middle. I have no idea what they’re going to decide here.

I won’t blame Google either way. I’d like to see them standing up for GN, but I can see why they wouldn’t. They’ll have a stronger arm against GN than they would against Bloomberg, because, let’s face it, Bloomberg has more money to throw at lawyers and making legal issues for Google, than GN does.

I do, however, entirely blame Bloomberg in all of this. I’m certain that GN is using any footage insert fair use laws with proper attribution to the original source (though, I haven’t seen this video yet, nor the one in question. I just know GN well enough to know that the likelihood that they didn’t, is basically zero).

GN already has my trust for their integrity. I can’t say the same for Google, YouTube, and certainly not Bloomberg… Ha.

I will, of course, be looking more deeply into this later, and I will amend my viewpoint as information is uncovered. Until then, good luck GN. You guys are heros and legends. Never stop being exactly who you are.