• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    72 months ago

    Actually the cost issues wouldn’t be the storage it’s self. Storage is pretty cheap, it’s content delivery networks. YouTube is supported by being owned and run by one of the worlds larges content delivery networks. There’s virtually no latency, videos play immediately.

    Having millions (potentially billions in YouTube’s case) of people accessing data at once is an immense challenge and YouTube perfected it pretty early on, that’s part of why there’s no competition.

    • @derpgon
      link
      English
      12 months ago

      Content delivery is not cheap, but not hard to do, either. I’d wager storage would be a bigger problem, because it just keeps rising. Sadly, YouTube is the one with money, and the monetization comes from people.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        52 months ago

        I can speak from experience that content delivery is harder than storage. Companies like YouTube tackle the storage issue by having tiered storage levels. Trending content is stored on SSDs, new and often viewed content is stored on harddrives with a caching system similar to optane and archived storage (essentially old videos that very rarely get views) goes on tape storage. It’s really cool, and it allows massive about of storage in a small space, it’s costs alot to implement but because of the tape storage they essentially have “infinite” (it’s not really infinite of course but it’s a problem for next decade not this decade).

        • @derpgon
          link
          English
          22 months ago

          Fair enough, but that’s YouTube, who can afford all of it. Of course, if you have tons of money, you don’t need to count pennies where counting them would just slow you down.

          But take a competitor - how can a different service be viable if they lack money to have (virtually) infinite storage? Heavy moderation or monetization. Youtube kinda does the second one.

          To reiterate, I am not saying you say things that are not correct.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 months ago

        I remember seeing a startup at one point that wanted to put mini-CDNs in people’s homes. Small black boxes that would automatically be a CDN not just for your home, but the whole area. Of course, sites would have to use their CDN network, etc.

        I actually thought it was a really interesting idea. Almost like federated CDNs.

        Imagine if every Xfinity router has a built-in 16TB CDN: it would be an interesting way to possibly change how bandwidth works and makes it back to the DCs. Most popular stuff would be closer, faster.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 months ago

          God could you imagine the security risks though, having a physical risk in a network, that would be fun. Limewire on steroids.