and yes, any company will easily accept a program made for them, they wont have to pay a programmer to make it, just one to check over the code to make sure its safe, and then maintain it

now the next danger comes from websites not wanting the tool compatible. mainly looking at youtube seeing the tool as a threat and trying to change their API and make the upload pieces private, or harder to deal with.

when the tool is new, this is a problem that could torpedo it.

true

what use is a tool that can't upload to the biggest game in town still

they wont want to help competition 😛

now, once it gets going, the reverse will be true. because if the tool makes life easy enough for content creators, then anything not on it, they just won't upload

"why spend time uploading to youtube when i could upload to 3 other video share sits without any more effort,a nd probably get the same amouint of views"

so if most creators use the tool, any new or existing site will want to make themselves compatible so they can get in on the action.

but, you need to get it to that level of popularity.

well if it gets going, it will shrink the monopoly, since people can then use any site they prefer,

Which will then create competition because different sites will then have exclusives on their site, so people get to spread out again

true, but they wouldn't want to cut themselves off from a popular way of getting content. instead they will probably strike deals with creators. and thats fine

you guys are missing a lot of points on that idea

by all means, poke holes

videos without the community aren't worth much

how would you handle the comments, likes, etc?

its an upload tool, the videos will stay on the site

in theory, can add that into the tool

or that

if there's a content ID on one site, would you remove the video from everywhere and reupload?

what do you mean by that?

I mean, your video gets claimed on youtube

also, the comments would probably stay local to the video (i.e. on the host site) but can be made visible from one location for the content maker

would you change the video and reupload only to youtube?

well, you should always allowed customization.

so, say maybe you have several sites, but the video you made doesn't work with ToS of a few of them.

checkmark button for which sites you want to upload to at that time 😄

you wouldn't want to upload. to those sites. so this is always a possibility of individual upload.

uncheck those that don't need a re-upload

you can make an ID for the video internal to the tool, so it can keep track of all the different copies

need to reupload or edit? select which sites to do that for, and have the logic for the best method for those sites built into the tool

you do understand the lower value of having the community segregated across multiple sites, right?

they already are on different sites

most area already on youtube and twitter

I only use youtube, I would risk and say 90%+ of people are also there

true, but its never a good idea to only have 1 site

anything outside of youtube is irrelevant

it doesn't matter if 90% of the traffic comes from one site. because if that site changes, that 90% could go away. if you have a back up, then you stand a good chance to get back that lost crowd

that is the problem this is aiming at

there's no platform that will be able to compete with youtube in the near future

no matter what tool you make, that won't change

sure it will, if youtube keeps shooting itself in the foot

there will be a rise of aggregators, but not of platforms

if there is no other platforms, then how can there a raise of aggregators?

the video content will still be from YT

@Grenade123 No one can compete with YT, It runs at a massive loss. The only way to take a share of the market would be for Amazon or such like to get involed.

so then the site serves no purpose

you make a site that tells people to go to youtube

why

>aggregator

to FIND what they want to watch

because YT is shitting on it's own platform on that matter

which means that youtube sucks doing that

which means there is room in the market to provide a better method

of aggregation yes

of another platform, no

why not?

@Poppy Rider said it. Because you will be burning money for a decade

here is a question, if youtube runs at a loss, WHY do they have?

monopoly

on lost money?

just like Uber

just like Facebook

just like Twitter

this is nothing new

Tesla too

Facebook only started to make money _AFTER_ the IPO

you just listed successful companies, (maybe minus tesla), then cited a failing company as being the same

oh, you mean it just takes too long to start making money

yup

okay, new question. how did youtube start in the first place

Uber still operates on a loss

google didn;t always own it

you need to look into that

because users == money

so they get investors

but never make any profit

until the endgame

the investors foot the bill

you have no idea of the costs of video content. Hell, even if you wanted to host JUST _your_ videos, it costs a LOT

I don't think YT can make money, ever. And be completely free. Far to much server space. The reason Google keeps YT is for the collection of data. It is a gold mine for any AI project. If you get something for free your are the product.

why does it cost money? what is the overhead? server space, and a webface, right?

Google would keep YT even if it didn't make money ever, because it makes money on their other products

and the people to maintain that

traffic costs alone are huge

HD space for the video in 5 different formats is another

Bandwidth and server maintenance.

Google or Mirosoft put a sever at the bottom of the ocean to save on cooling.

well, i just figured out what the first instantiation on the moon will be

although thats not entirely accurate. space is rather hot for being so cold

Supermarkets are offering their frozen storage space to server providers. It's really expensive.

The coldest natural place in the sola system is on the moon. A creater on the northpole has never seen the sun.

first installation on the moon from private companies: a server farm

Let's start with Greenland shall we. And see how we go fro mthere.

i mean, why not start with the Antarctica? land has to be cheaper, less government regs, probably colder too

I don't think you're far from the truth there. Fast forward a few decades and you'll have power stations being commissioned there.

So it's clear that you can't make things 100% free like YouTube. Well, unless you are a data collection firm. But we all know how well people like those. So what about something in the middle. Free you get X amount of hours of free video hosting. Hit that limit, you need to free up space. The sell teirs or features. Because part of the problem with youtube is that probably most of the stuff it is storing, it's not get much if any traffic. So basically it's free storage.