• MoonlightFox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    There is one thing that is vital that is missing from peertube. Effective monetization.

    By watching on peertube I am a drain on resources. A net negative. I’d happily pay to offset those costs and more, but I want it to be shared amongst multiple creators and hosters.

    I don’t want to just support one, I want to support most of the network for the hosting and bandwidth, and a certain amount divided amongst the creators I watch.

    If PeerTube introduces some sort of payment / monetization solution, it might get more creators as well. Without it I can’t see it growing fast enough to compete with YouTube in the near future.

    Well… Sooner or later the costs of Full HD compressed video will be negligible for hosting and bandwidth, so that might be when YouTube gets a real challenge. So I guess we’ll see

    • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      I remember the pre-Youtube internet where we created content because it was fun or educational, not because we needed money for the task of doing so.

      Paying for server costs and maintaining them, sure. MetaFilter has a good system for that, they’re effectively a non-profit and have a donation structure and paid admins and moderators. The rest of the people on the site, they just make good content for the sake of making good content, not because they feel the need to be paid for their time doing it.

      God I miss the pre-Youtube era. “Content creators” looking for a payday via advertising are a fucking cancer.

      • Muyal_Hix@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        People expect to pay a carpenter or a plumber for their services, why shouldn’t entertainers and content creators be allowed to get paid for their work?

      • TowardsTheFuture@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        23 hours ago

        I mean, sure but we are past that. No large YouTuber will give up getting paid, and go to a system with a much smaller user base so even stuff like affiliate links and sponsorships are worth less. Basically double lose money just to join peertube. Especially since most large YouTubers have a team of people who they pay, so they cannot afford for their employees sake to take such a large loss just to support peertube.

        More likely this leads to Vimeo, or like twitch TikTok or something else being able to support a normal video platform than it leads to people using peertube.

        • monarch@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          21 hours ago

          I will never understand people who identify as leftist that refuse to understand that under our current economic model people require money to survive and if they do not get money for doing their creative work they might not be able to continue making that work.

          It is not selfish to want to be payed for working on something like a video that in some cases takes hundreds of man hours of work to complete. There is a reason that the quality of content available on youtube has gone up massively. Say what you want about the writing but there is no way that something like helluva boss could ever have been made entirely online before youtube.

          • slackassassin@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            It’s because some people don’t actually support workers, especially creative workers, regardless or their political identity.

          • nyamlae@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            11 hours ago

            It is not selfish to want to be payed for working on something like a video that in some cases takes hundreds of man hours of work to complete

            Yes, it is, if your desire to get paid causes you to remain on corporate-controlled social media, to the detriment of society.

            Not to mention, plenty of people can and do put hundreds of hours of work into projects that they don’t ask for payment for.

            “Content creators” who get paid through advertisements are class traitors whose interests are aligned with the capitalist class. They will fuck over society to make a buck for themselves.

            • monarch@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              5 hours ago

              Do you think the same thing about people who work for basically any company? Because they are way more directly responsible for the actions of their corporation than the average person that makes 50k a year between AdSense and sponsors.

              • nyamlae@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 hours ago

                No, my point specifically relates to creative work. You said in your comment:

                under our current economic model people require money to survive and if they do not get money for doing their creative work they might not be able to continue making that work.

                This is false, basically. They can do other types of work. Creative work can be done without making money for it. Plenty of people have a day job and make creative work in their free time. The same option is not available for most other types of work, such as government, doctors, lawyers, etc. If you try to do these types of jobs outside of the framework of a regulated business, you’ll get the book thrown at you.

                The issue I’m getting at isn’t “are you responsible for the actions you take to make a living”. Rather, I’m getting at the issue of “does creative work require becoming an employee of a capitalist company, thereby siding with its shareholders in having a vested interest in increasing that company’s profits regardless of the societal damage caused?”

                The answer to that question is a resounding “no”. Creatives need to grow a spine and get a day job.

                • monarch@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 hours ago

                  Why specifically creatives? There are so many other professions that are more important to someones everyday life and no one seems to hold the same vitriol at them valuing their time that people do for creatives. I don’t see people suggesting that nurses get a day job and do nursing on the side.

                  • nyamlae@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 hour ago

                    It has to do with the societal consequences of how them “valuing their time” impacts people. Nurses refusing to do volunteer nursing has little impact on the overall system of access to healthcare.

                    Healthcare is heavily regulated through legislation, and is going to be free or paid or corporate or not corporate largely as a result of the legislation. Nurses can’t just do what they want. People who are concerned about the state of healthcare should therefore change things by targeting legislation, not by targeting nurses.

                    Creative work is not like this. Creatives refusing to do do volunteer creative work means that either they will charge for their work, which creates a barrier to access, or they will use (and push others to use) platforms like YouTube and TokTok that make money from ad data.

                    The former choice results in class differences in access to art, and the latter choice results in everyone using platforms that have proven themselves to be hostile to minoritized groups and progressive causes. These outcomes aren’t legislated – they are the result of creatives choosing to “value their time”.

                    In otherwords, creatives choosing to “value their time” means that they will happily enforce class-based restrictions in access to art, and will happily support conservative corporations and surveillance capitalism.

                    And I practice what I preach, too. I have spent thousands of hours developing free software and making free educational materials for people, donating my labour to support progressive causes and supporting others who do the same. Creatives who insist on charging for their work are a ball and chain on the movements I support. They are leeches and class traitors.

                    Creatives should value other people. Fuck their time.

            • TowardsTheFuture@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 hours ago

              “you’re not a leftist unless you have daddies money to support you wasting 100 hours on a 20m video.” Certainly is… a take. But anyways, I’m not even talking about being leftist or not or whatever. I just mean, people. Period. It’s not selfish to want to get paid for making something. People need money to live.

              Are there content creators who fucking suck? Yes. But there’s also ones that don’t. They’re allowed to make money.

              • nyamlae@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 hours ago

                you’re not a leftist unless you have daddies money to support you wasting 100 hours on a 20m video.

                I didn’t say that, though. Clearly it’s not worth engaging with you.

      • MoonlightFox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        23 hours ago

        I subscribe to a lot of full time “content creators” that are ad supported and supported via donations.

        I curate my feed meticulously to avoid slop, and I get a lot of value, learning and entertainment from those I follow.

        I believe they deserve to be paid for the tremendous amount of work they put in.

        Some sort of ability to generate a livable wage from creating high quality content seems reasonable, no?

        • KeenFlame@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          18 hours ago

          You can pay them. They can choose to require it. Nobody needs to pay a fucking gestapo in between

      • andros_rex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        22 hours ago

        MetaFilter has a good system for that, they’re effectively a non-profit and have a donation structure and paid admins and moderators.

        MetaFilter has at multiple points been on the verge of shutting down, no? IIRC, you pay $5 for an account.