@atomicpoet sounds great, let me know where I can sign up ‍️

@gatesvp Still in exploration phase.

@atomicpoet It shouldn't cost much, if you already have machines on networks with decent bandwidth. Then again, I know all "cloud" things are meant to extract profit once they become popular, and video hosting could easily go from nothing to something quickly.

How many terabytes of storage and how many terabytes of transfer per month are we talking about here? This could easily be started on resources that some of us already have and can be scaled up later, rather than using "cloud" and worrying about some huge bill at some point.

@AnachronistJohn Okay, but you got to remember that, even with peer-to-peer connectivity, federation of video can have big costs.

There’s a reason there’s not many Peertube servers with open registrations.

@atomicpoet Sure, but that just means people should be careful.

For instance, I have colocated machines with uncapped bandwidth. I can run stuff without having to worry about getting some multi-thousand dollar bill at the end of the month. But people who are hosting services with typical providers, of course, would need to be very deliberate and careful to make sure they don't come close to their maximum transfer.

So are you talking about setting up a Peertube co-op that hosts videos for a thousand users? Ten thousand? A hundred thousand? I'm curious because I'd be willing to offer resources.

@atomicpoet ipfs?

@AnachronistJohn Still in exploratory phase, so I’m non-committal about the fine details. But potentially, this would be a consumer co-op where to participate, you’d have to be a member-owner who contributes to the cost.

@mylesw No specificities yet. What would be more important is setting up the society.

@atomicpoet @AnachronistJohn isn't this just "pay for your space" but with extra steps? I mean, anyone could start an instance, and just charge people for the amount of space and bandwidth they use couldn't they?

I guess I'm just wondering what I'm missing here? Is there something of added value to having it be a "co-op"?

@Mrfunkedude @AnachronistJohn Yep, the added value is you’re not a customer, you’re a member-owner. Which means you would have certain rights a mere customer does not.

@atomicpoet @AnachronistJohn

I have to say that a major reason why I have not opened my PeerTube up is the question of legal liability.

People are fussier about video: I could get sued for infringing music or video, illegal/pornographic content, etc, etc. Even defamation, I guess.

At the moment, I don't comply with DMCA regulations to have "safe harbor" status. But if I DO, then that means I'm registered in an official database. Is that a good idea?

And if I DO, I want to make sure that I have *creator-friendly* set of terms that makes it as hard as possible for copyright trolls to be a problem. Without actually stepping across the line into being a "pirate site" and getting my ass sued out of existence.

@atomicpoet @AnachronistJohn I guess that's what I can't wrap my head around. I mean, I can see the value in having a vote into what goes on in the instance, but is that the only benefit?

Thanks for helping me understand.

Mr. Funk E. Dude Bitslingers-R-Us The major benefit is governance. No one single person sets policy. There’s collective consensus.

A good example is pricing. Instead of some arbitrary number, the collective decides what is fair.

Moreover, because a co-op runs under the aegis of member-owners, the goal isn’t mere profit but to serve the needs of the membership—whatever those needs are decided to be.

Member-ownerships means resistance to enshittification.

Space Catitude 🚀 Bitslingers-R-Us Yeah, that’s a major reason I think a co-op would be beneficial. It gives you some legal protections.

@atomicpoet Count me in!

@roland