I think humanity should have a Blockchain version of YouTube

[Spindel]

So a Oneswarm version of youtube? Wait a sec (checks if Oneswarm still is a thing)…

 

…so Onewarm still exists (http://www.oneswarm.org), the difference of Oneswarm and your idea is just the UX letting you play videos directly.

 

[WolframaticAlpha]

On 9/7/2023 at 12:58 AM, thach958 said:

Each video uploaded on the "Ourtube" network will be fragmented, each fragment will be stored on any Blockchain.

There is a reason why most social media is not P2P. Streaming video fragments is tremendously inefficient as compared to streaming from a central server. Nevermind the fact that P2P is good only for ephemerally storing content, since when all the nodes hosting content go offline, the content isn't there. If you try sharding all content and distribute those shards using some algorithm, you open a Pandora's box, that leads to either:

1. Unintended corruption of most data

2. Centralisation

On 9/7/2023 at 12:58 AM, thach958 said:

And it's blockchain, no one can find out your IP address to sue you for uploading copyrighted content, NO ONE can control this blockchain, including the author who created it, just like bitcoin.

It is quite easy to deanonymise and track users on blockchains(i think UCSF or USC published a paper in like 2013) ou can implement a more opaque system, akin to monero, but that has its own host of issues. There are easier ways to implement content ownership, most notably on the client side, by using a system derived from content ID.

On 9/9/2023 at 2:54 AM, 05032-Mendicant-Bias said:

You just reinvented Torrent, and made it slower, and strapped an exploitative reward scheme to it.

A major part of the youtube value chain is just the discovery tools that youtube has, i.e. apps and website. Also, I think the user wishes to implement a blockchain to replace the IP addresses with random accounts.

[William Payne]

I love youtube. I happily pay for youtube premium so as to not get adds. For me it has replaced television. It is also a convenient platform for should I stop procrastinating and make my own videos of some kind. 

 

Here are my issues with youtube competitors. I subscribe to dozens of channels. Many make you pay per channel. It would make me go broke. It is why I am not big on using patreon, it is just too expensive. 

 

Tech for the sake of tech is not overly appealing. Youtube is easy, I search a subject and videos show up. I watch a video on a subject and other similar videos are recommended to me. 

 

Some people say the algorithm hurts smaller changes because it doesn't push them. If that is the case why are most of the channels I watch and most of the ones recommended to me small channels?

 

Think about why the google search engine is probably the most popular. Because it is simple. It is a search bar on an otherwise blank page that does exactly what you want it to and is stupidly simple. 

[William Payne]

I am going to take you back in time to a world long gone that is older than many on this site I imagine. Pre youtube if you wanted to watch videos of things online you either watched ebaums world for funny stuff. Or you had a downloader sort of like git that was saved as an application on your computer. I for the life of me can't remember what it was called. But you would search for something and it would list .MOV files found online related to what you searched. No picture, no thumbnails. You had to hope like mad that what you were downloading was not a trojan. Viruses were very very common back then. 

 

Everything was pirated and you had no idea of the quality you were getting until you had downloaded it. Youtube was an absolute godsend in comparison when it came out. 

 

Also the way pirated movies/music/tv/anime was distributed back then was commonly between other enthusiasts. You had to find someone who had what you were after and make a trade and you would generally trade stuff between people via cd's. 

 

What we have today is not perfect. But what the original poster described sounds horribly complicated. 

[thach958]

I thought about many possibilities, including the worst possibility, who are these users of the Ourtube blockchain?, I think when we denounce a murderer, should we also denounce the person who sold weapons?  gas for him?

[William Payne]

3 hours ago, thach958 said:

, I think when we denounce a murderer, should we also denounce the person who sold weapons?  gas for him?

 

That actually happens if they were sold via illegal practices. People get charged for illegal distribution all the time. 

[Uttamattamakin]

On 9/6/2023 at 2:44 PM, thevictor390 said:

You're kind of mixing up blockain and peer to peer in a way that would not even remotely work. You can't store (enough) data on a blockchain.

THIS.  I think @thach958 is thinking of some sort of P2P video sharing similar to bit torrent BUT with a crypto token aspect to it which would reward people for either creating on the network OR for hosting the data. 

Say this works by taking any video and breaking it into 1 million little pieces.  So no one computer host all of the data for any video.  No one computer has any way to play the video from the network.  When a particular video is requested by a client,  those little packets of video are streamed in from that 1 million computers.  Maybe everyone on the network can devote some of their own drive space to defray the cost.  (There was a crypto token based on that).  

So basically we'd need a P2P video system similar to bit torrent... but with the videos broken into thousands or millions of packets and copied across the network.   This way no one is hosting any one copy of anything and, therefore, cannot be liable for hosting something naughty or just unliked by govt (Dissident moments would love this). 

Meanwhile taking part in this network would be rewarded with tokens that can be farmed by hosting the video data and paid to creators  or bought for fiat money and paid to creators and/or distributed to those who host.  

There would have to be some way to Block or take down certain objectionable matterial.  Though if this is open source there is no way to stop CLEARLY vile content from being shared. 

[William Payne]

One other thing I will add is if you want technology to flourish, you can't limit it to only those with the knowledge to make it work. Keeping things within ones little club is a great way to limit the number of uses. However the issue there is that usually those who want to keep thing behind a locked door are deliberately doing so to limit the number of users. Some people do not want "their thing" to be popular. 

[Uttamattamakin]

16 hours ago, William Payne said:

I for the life of me can't remember what it was called. But you would search for something and it would list .MOV files found online related to what you searched. No picture, no thumbnails. You had to hope like mad that what you were downloading was not a trojan. Viruses were very very common back then. 

You mean Lime Wire.  Lime Wire was (is?) to every kind of file what Napster was to MP3's of Eminem's Stan.  (I was in my early 20's when that was a thing). Sigh. 

16 hours ago, William Payne said:

 

Everything was pirated and you had no idea of the quality you were getting until you had downloaded it. Youtube was an absolute godsend in comparison when it came out. 

The real pre-youtube youtube wasn't Limewire though. Websites did have video embedded in them.  Most all of them used plugins such as Macromedia Flash and before then Real Player.  Real video was the standard from the mid 90's to around 2002 ish. 

The first viral clip I can think of was this. 

16 hours ago, William Payne said:

 

Also the way pirated movies/music/tv/anime was distributed back then was commonly between other enthusiasts. You had to find someone who had what you were after and make a trade and you would generally trade stuff between people via cd's. 

 

What we have today is not perfect. But what the original poster described sounds horribly complicated. 

What the OP describes sounds like more of a protocol that other applications could be built on.  Kinda like how HTML and the web are complicated but the complexity is used to present us with a nice user interface. 

[William Payne]

2 minutes ago, Uttamattamakin said:

You mean Lime Wire.  Lime Wire was (is?) to every kind of file what Napster was to MP3's of Eminem's Stan.  (I was in my early 20's when that was a thing). Sigh. 

The real pre-youtube youtube wasn't Limewire though. Websites did have video embedded in them.  Most all of them used plugins such as Macromedia Flash and before then Real Player.  Real video was the standard from the mid 90's to around 2002 ish. 

The first viral clip I can think of was this. 

What the OP describes sounds like more of a protocol that other applications could be built on.  Kinda like how HTML and the web are complicated but the complexity is used to present us with a nice user interface. 

 

LIME WIRE!!!! that was it!! Thank you. Oh absolutely, imbedded video was a thing for years. But there was nothing that would truly compare to youtube. To be fair there still isn't. 

[maplepants]

One of the uniquely hilarious aspects of every "we should use blockchain for *x*" pitches is how much of the problem solving has to tackle problems that only arise because of the blockchain and rely heavily on magical thinking.

 

On 9/6/2023 at 9:28 PM, thach958 said:

 

update 1: To ensure that "underground forces" do not have a chance to sabotage "Ourtube", I recommend that blockchains be equipped with AI accelerators, the purpose of which is to quickly check whether the uploaded video is trash, causing full capacity status of the entire “Ourtube” network

This might as well be asking for a magic wand to stop the bad people from taking advantage of a system that is otherwise trivial to take advantage of.

[05032-Mendicant-Bias]

12 hours ago, Uttamattamakin said:

What the OP describes sounds like more of a protocol that other applications could be built on.

Torrent. But blockchain based and with an exploitative reward scheme. I can predict it would become a "youtube" where a thousand channels are all playing Elon Musk bitcoin grift livestream in loop, like it happened when LTT was hacked. P.S. Tesla quietly dumped the bitcoins it bought.

3 hours ago, maplepants said:

This might as well be asking for a magic wand to stop the bad people from taking advantage of a system that is otherwise trivial to take advantage of.

Correct, but to compare a blockchain fraud with a real world technology with real world use, is to entertain the thought that the comparison is meaningful. It isn't. Blockchain developers just make nebolous pitches, and answer to all questions with more nebolous pitches until the target marks self select like a Nigerian Prince Scam. "A DAO will fix it!" "AI will fix it" "DeFi will be better!" "Thing X works, we do the same as X but decentralized!"  

On 9/6/2023 at 9:28 PM, thach958 said:

update 4: I'm wondering whether to choose Bitcoin or ETH to use it as a tool to share advertising money, when a viewer sees one or more ads in a video, all blockchains containing that video and uploader will receive money from the advertiser, 50% for uploader, 50% for many nodes

Just read it. The complexity entailed by this system alone is unfathomable. How is an AD uploaded? Who decides what AD should play where? What system checks that the AD view has not been double counted? What about bots "viewing" a video to farm AD views? Who decides when to withdraw magic beans from an AD provider? Remember, this is a decentralized system, it must be designed under the assumptions that all anonymous nodes anywhere in the world are trying to game the systems to fabricate magic beans reward out of thin air.

All self inflicted problems that youtube doesn't have to face, because youtube controls youtube's servers. If this were to be implemented as Ethereum microprograms, each individual computation that writes on the blockchain could costs thousands of dollars, how many youtube channels pull that type of revenue?

There can never be a "blockchain torrent youtube with perverse exploitative revenue", because such system can never bring in organic revenue. All the money can only come from marks until the systems is abbandoned and the fraud artists spin up the next scheme.

Even if you entertain the ideas proposed, do you know there was a crypto wiki, that implemented the exact incentive scheme proposed in this thread? it became a wiki with blockchain develpers earning wiki's magic beans by making articles about themselves for promotion until it vanished, because only fraudsters were writing for it.

And yes, it vanished. Because for all the claims that blockchain is forever and immutable, it only is until the thing makes enough money to pay for the servers. Making Web3 just like every other Web2 page, only more expensive.

 

There are Decentralized products that work in the real world, but they don't market themselves as being decentralized:

The Torrent network works for the same reason wikipedia works. It's for free, and people find value in sharing. A paid Torrent network or a paid Wikipedia have been attempted and they do not work.
The Tor network is decentralized. The reward for using Tor? That you are using Tor and your traffic is anonimized. You could be a drug dealer, someone that searches for a gift online, or a journalist/spy in China. A paid Tor network wouldn't work, because the money you withdraw makes it that much easier to identify you, making the whole idea pointless.

 

[Uttamattamakin]

3 hours ago, 05032-Mendicant-Bias said:

Torrent. But blockchain based and with an exploitative reward scheme. I can predict it would become a "youtube" where a thousand channels are all playing Elon Musk bitcoin grift livestream in loop, like it happened when LTT was hacked. P.S. Tesla quietly dumped the bitcoins it bought.

You are not wrong.  There would be A LOT of scams.  There would also be films of adults doing adult things.  There would be videos from dissidents showing governments, gangs, and others with power doing things they don't want people to see.  There would be exploitation of the innocent ... to a degree enough to allow the powerful to vilify any such a protocol. (i.e. like they do with the so-called "dark web"). 

You know whats ironic.  Due to the ability of such a video system to distribute information embarrassing to governments the most likely people to develop such a system would be the global intelligence community.  The basic idea of TOR was invented in a US Naval research laboratory. 

 

3 hours ago, 05032-Mendicant-Bias said:

There can never be a "blockchain torrent youtube with perverse exploitative revenue", because such system can never bring in organic revenue. All the money can only come from marks until the systems is abbandoned and the fraud artists spin up the next scheme.

That depends.  This could be said of any website.  If they don't achieve a certain critical mass they fade away.  

 

This alternative would have to be able to spend a long time being like Mastodon.  Niche, experimental and only for enthusiast UNTIL Youtube does something so egregious that it causes people to migrate to it en mass.  

That said, Blockchain based file and video sharing protocols exist.  So far no one has arisen to be more popular than the other. 

 

[Kisai]

On 9/6/2023 at 12:28 PM, thach958 said:

-Are you so fed up with google's youtube?, let me explain

-I will temporarily call YouTube's Blockchain version "Ourtube"

-Every uploader or viewer will have a token key, like bitcoin

-Each video uploaded on the "Ourtube" network will be fragmented, each fragment will be stored on any Blockchain.

-Each person contributes one or several old PCs, installs an additional hard drive, upgrades the internet network speed package, installs that "OurtubeOS" blockchain, anyone who watches videos on that computer will earn advertising dollars.

-As for the risk of uploading content, there is a rating system that is synchronized with all blockchains, the list of good or bad, the owner of the video, the blockchain containing the video is like a yellow page book, data is end-to-end encrypted just like bitcoin

-And it's blockchain, no one can find out your IP address to sue you for uploading copyrighted content, NO ONE can control this blockchain, including the author who created it, just like bitcoin.

-The worst case when you can't access this network because of DNS blocking, can't see the web, people can make the app to circumvent the law.

 

 

Did you put more than 10 minutes of thought into this? Are you trying to troll?

 

Let's just debunk this.

 

First, everyone who is a dirty pirate for media already knows about bittorrent. Despite it's best intentions, it's largely been ignored from been mass adopted by commercial interests, and has been used mostly for piracy, and as a result of how it was originally used, it forced ISP's to basically throttle your connection if data is sent on any port other than 443 (SSL)

 

The reason "data caps" came back was entirely because of bittorrent before streaming took off. ISP's only cared about how much data you were pulling down, their networks were not designed to "upload" anything. You peon are to be a consumer of only what the ISP wants you doing. If you want to upload stuff, you pay for commercial internet at a much higher tariff.

 

Second. Blockchain has no place here. Blockchain is about authenticating that something is what it says it is, and that only matters for things with monetary value.  If you're going to try and propose a file sharing network based on money, I hate to break it to you, but "file locker" websites that contain almost entirely pirated media, already exist and do this. People don't/won't pay for access to data they know should be free.

 

Here's how you more or less "do this correctly"

 

Step 1. remove the idea of any kind of central authority over anything. The person who right-click's and selects "publish to the internet" should have the ability to set three controls on the file:

 

a) Sign off that they have permission to share this piece of media. This signs the media with a certificate they self-generated, and some unique data in plain english(or other native language) stipulating they know this will be free to watch, access, and download without penalty. Copyright holders with commercial interests, eg ones like Disney, pay for a commercial certificate so their signatures literately say "This is property of Disney Corporation, this video has been published by Disney and is free to download, watch for personal use only". The purpose of this is simply to state the purpose of the video, as nobody is actually going to read it, but it creates a unique "Creator" meta tag.

 

b) Assign which parts you want to remain exclusive control over, split media into modular pieces that make sense. So for example a television episode will be split into a dozen files, at present this would be something like AV1, 240p, 480p build, 720p build, 1080p build, 2160p build, AAC Stereo, AAC 5.1, Opus Stereo, Opus Stereo+ (eg 5.1/7.1, etc), per language, and captions per language, plus "video patch" per language. So you start by downloading the 240p and AAC Stereo/Opus Stereo file, plus maybe the english language text captions, this will give you a picture of what the video should look like, and if you're in a hurry, you can use hardware DLSS/FRS on the video to watch it before any of the build files are downloaded. Ultimately, if you are on a device that can not playback 4K video and Stereo+ audio, the device (eg a smartTV) won't request those files from where you are storing them. But we're getting ahead of ourselves. The same goes for all other kinds of media. Laziness is what prevents proper splitting, but film and television is the one that needs the most help, next to video games, because often something is just pushed out the door and translators have to go back and transcribe or machine-translate from english text captions. So maybe Disney uses their in-house translators for English, Japanese, French, Spanish, and German, and then fans in other countries create their own pieces to "patch into" the disney master. This is where this concept makes the most sense and is better than the status quo. So if you don't select exclusive control over your own produced parts, that means others are free to produce a patch for that. For example, you can have a Chinese or Korean caption and dub patch, that only replaces the audio and captions tracks. Disney might not produce it, and they can clean their hands of any censorship imposed by government by not producing it. Someone in Mainland China can produce the "government approved" patch that tells the playlist to skip segments. But the original version is never touched, and any third-party parts added will not damage the original. 

 

c) Specify streaming topology. So "this file is to only be seeded by machine X, seeds only", where X might not be your actual PC, but some third party CDN, or maybe an in-house system. Basically "who controls this file" this is assigned to an actual computer address. Basically it looks like a "magnet" link, but inside it, specifies the data from A and B, and instructions on how to stream it. For example "this is a live stream, seeded by X device", so people who join the seed first who have the highest available bandwidth can connect directly to the device if they agree to share all parts of the video. If someone selects only the 480p stream, they can never connect to X as long as a seed connected directly to X is alive. If something isn't being "live" streamed, eg it's baked content, then, X might just be the device with the actual files on it. X can be replaced by another device with the same address in the seed network. How do you get this address? See A.

 

Features:

1) Kill switch - If a file needs to be removed, and everyone with a piece of it needs to remove it, a "kill version" command is sent to all seeds to cease seeding immediately. This means availability becomes zero, and the "head" of the stream will no longer bring it back. Of course some people might write their own clients to ignore "kill version" requests, but ultimately the idea is that the person who put the file on the internet, also has the responsibility to "make the best effort to remove it" if they no longer want it available. 

2) Client privacy - As every file put up is it's own island, only those invited to share the file will have access to it. There is no escaping containment. For example a video might have meta data for a stream key/media key, which encrypts the original video files/stream so even those "invited to share" the data, does not actually have permission to watch it.

*media keys are beyond the scope of this post, but the point is the seed network is not concerned with the actual protection of copyright, purchases, and so forth, it's does not know what it is sharing beyond the meta data in A and B above*

Anyone can connect to the seed network and download the file, but you still need permission to watch/open it, which is something that some clients designed as a video player would probably do as a complete client, such as a smart TV or a smartphone. Also no requirement to encrypt the media at all, the file's are signed so the checksums will authenticate they haven't been damaged or intercepted and changed.

3) Clients only connect to authorized seeds, and only download data from other peers if the streaming topology says to. For example a live stream might have clients that connect 29 minutes into the video, so peers might connect to each other and "build out" the video by seeking randomly from each other until they have the entire stream up to the current broadcast point.

4) Most content types have "build up" data. So you can start by downloading the 240p/64kbps audio to have a "seekable" video, and then when you seek through the 4K video stream without having to download all of it right now. A game might do the same with level asset packages, where the game can start being played once the first asset package is downloaded, and the game will download in the background the next level.

 

So basically this would simply be taking the existing way "bit torrent" works and adding some features to allow commercial exploitation, and trust, thus infrastructure to be built around media being distributed this way. Especially with the pivot to AI and fake content laundering lately, it's now important to have a single source of truth for how any specific media gets onto the internet. So if some news footage from the BBC, CBC, Aljazeera, CNN, etc gets onto the internet, it would be signed as having been published by that company, unaltered. Altered content will not be signed by who it's supposed to be signed by. Patches into the media are signed by who makes the alterations, and you never have to download patches you don't want.

 

When you download something, you are given an address for the head of the seed distribution point, any machine that has that address, acts as a seed for the seed network, plus any patches to that media that they've selected to include. So English seeds might only have the English tracks, and Spanish seeds might only have the Spanish language audio and captions with the original video. There is no requirement to have everything, but by "having everything" as stated in B, allows the seed to be near the top of the seed topology. If you have third-party patches/languages available, those are reconciled with the head-end as which are approved to be included by everyone, anything not approved is just not shown unless the seed address you are given has it.

 

As for "topology" this is beyond the scope of a forum post, but one of the reasons why so much bandwidth is wasted by "streaming" in the first place is because you have 100 people connecting to see the same video file, but each with individually negotiated encryption keys or media access keys (or both), so that means each data stream is unique per viewer, and thus it's enormously expensive to stream content instead of having 100 people "have exactly the same file" that they can P2P build up themselves by self-discovering local peers on the same ISP, or even on the same LAN.

 

As a real example right now, maybe I might want to watch twitch, but I need to switch between my phone and my television every 20 minutes due to some task or exercise or whatever. The way streaming works right now, this requires opening two connections to twitch, which consumes twice my bandwidth, and all the intermediate peering between Twitch and My ISP.

 

Now imagine if that only required one stream, and the second device watching on the LAN actually asks the first device for their stream rather connecting back to Twitch. Can't be done with existing web-driven software because that's not how it works (cause... ads and subscriptions.) But imagine how much bandwidth can be saved by not having to establish unique connections for the sake of security when the decrypted data is not unique.

 

Ultimately things get really complex, and the average content creator can not be arsed to do things properly. But imagine for a minute that "reacting" to video can be done by watching videos that have been expressly shared to do so. You could setup a topology where the original video seed pool is connected, and then "you, the react streamer" live patches the video and audio with your overlay and additional audio channel. This ensures that everyone sees the same video at the same time, and if the head-end is collecting statistics, they "get the views" for it.

 

Again, payment is beyond the scope of this. Never mix payment with distribution, because that incentivizes stealing/laundering data. There is a perverse incentive right now on youtube and tiktok to steal something, push it through an AI filter to change the data slightly (eg "AI music covers") to collect the ad revenue while producing counterfeit no-effort content.

 

So going right back to why I made this reply, we are on the cusp of the loss of "authenticity" because existing platforms such as youtube and tiktok have a perverse incentive to allow people to make fake content to earn ad revenue. What needs to change, is that authentic content needs to be discovered and not displaced by counterfeits. So that means there needs to be a mechanism to acquire the authentic content (be it a commercial product, PD or a CC0 video), and while I'm certain youtube COULD leverage contentID to make this work, the lack of any ability to discover what the authentic media is on youtube is disastrous. When I upload something that incorporates the original material, and I get a claim from some random no-effort garbage cover of that material, that is something that should NEVER happen, and yet, this happens to people playing games like Legend of Zelda, all the time, because Nintendo doesn't put their OST's on Youtube, (In fact, a lot of pirated media would go away on youtube if companies would pull their head out of their collective asses and realize they hurt the discovery of their media when they don't make it available on youtube in any form.)

[thach958]

3 hours ago, Kisai said:

Did you put more than 10 minutes of thought into this? Are you trying to troll?

At least I feel like I'm starting to hate the centralized power thing, I can be anonymous and use "authoritative" material to make cartoons freely with AI, I like EDM, and many characters  other "copyrights", and those are things that only dream of being able to upload something like that on youtube, let alone make money

[thach958]

3 hours ago, Kisai said:

Again, payment is beyond the scope of this. Never mix payment with distribution, because that incentivizes stealing/laundering data. There is a perverse incentive right now on youtube and tiktok to steal something, push it through an AI filter to change the data slightly (eg "AI music covers") to collect the ad revenue while producing counterfeit no-effort content.

I think stealing assets from "tycoon" organizations is irrelevant, and I don't think those "tycoons" will sit idly by if Ourtube has achieved "big enough" popularity.  Above all, I hate the "BIG3", and they will always have a solution to deal with this, at least to survive.

Edited September 12, 2023 by thach958

[Poinkachu]

41 minutes ago, thach958 said:

At least I feel like I'm starting to hate the centralized power thing, I can be anonymous and use "authoritative" material to make cartoons freely with AI, I like EDM, and many characters  other "copyrights", and those are things that only dream of being able to upload something like that on youtube, let alone make money

 

33 minutes ago, thach958 said:

I think stealing assets from "tycoon" organizations is irrelevant, and I don't think those "tycoons" will sit idly by if Ourtube has achieved "big enough" popularity.  Above all, I hate the "BIG3", and they will always have a solution to deal with this, at least to survive.

 

Huh? so this is the vibe I am getting right now :

1. You want to steal copyrighted characters and use it to make money without any risk ?

2. Stealing from the rich can be considered A-okay ?

 

Well, if people steals your assets and can't be punished, and the platform itself allows doing it. One of the solution is to do the same.

What's stopping the big corpo from stealing assets from small creators and using their capital prowess to "promote" it better ?

If the platform is truly anonymous, that means they can be anon too. And o' boy they sure have more capital, be it for AI hardwares or manpower.

 

If NVIDIA sees there's a shit ton of money that they can get from just basically stealing IPs and remaking it a bit on this so called "Ourtube" without risk, I'm pretty sure they gonna fire up maybe 1-2 warehouses full with their newest AI accelerator, and add more accordingly with profit rate.

Heck, they might even create something so that the system can auto steal as well. Would be stupid not doing so as one if not the biggest AI hardware creator and vendor right now. Hint: People buys hardware from them.

 

Then soon enough the platform gonna be pretty much dominated by big corps anyway.

 

Also, another thing :
Usually, people who live in centralized world hate how centralized it is until they feel the kind of chaos de-centralized can bring.

My country's been there, I pretty much tasted it.

[thach958]

3 minutes ago, Poinkachu said:

Then soon enough the platform gonna be pretty much dominated by big corps anyway.

yeah, anyway I find this method still fair for most creative needs, there's always a risk like you just mentioned, for example, I like to animate Tristana, I use a brainwave scanner on a  The PC has Nvidia's GPU, and incorporates some EDM versions I like, but honestly, how can an ignorant wanderer like me get a license to use it?, and if the "tycoons" also have it, it's completely possible.  can do the same thing, I personally would like that to happen even more, the most important thing in the end is the ability to win the hearts of fans, and above all, Ourtube cannot be tampered with by the recommendation algorithm.

[Poinkachu]

39 minutes ago, thach958 said:

yeah, anyway I find this method still fair for most creative needs, there's always a risk like you just mentioned, for example, I like to animate Tristana, I use a brainwave scanner on a  The PC has Nvidia's GPU, and incorporates some EDM versions I like, but honestly, how can an ignorant wanderer like me get a license to use it?, and if the "tycoons" also have it, it's completely possible.  can do the same thing, I personally would like that to happen even more, the most important thing in the end is the ability to win the hearts of fans, and above all, Ourtube cannot be tampered with by the recommendation algorithm.

Um... I don't think so.

 

You're basically wanting to create a platform where people can make money off stolen stuffs that they stole from WHEREVER THEY WANT anonimously & without risk.

What's stopping peoples from stealing small creator's IPs from other platforms and publishing it as "theirs" anonimously?

 

If you think "The most important thing is the ability to win the hearts of fans", then you shouldn't shy away from creating your original characters. No?

While so far the vibe I am getting is "I only want to animate Tristana for some reason and I want to get money from it eventhough I know I am not the original creator of this character".

 

instead of

 

"I am struggling to find ideas to make an original character of my own that people like"

 

So basically, Sorry but the ultimate vibe I am getting now :

 

"I just want to publish and get money from some stuffs other people made and I did some remodel/recolor of it, without risk.  So much so that I want a platform where publishing stolen IPs can be pretty much encouraged, eventhough in the end the platform may end up being overrun by big corps anyway, and while there's a high chance that small original artist on the side gets fucked over more".

[thach958]

8 minutes ago, Poinkachu said:

and while there's a high chance that small original artist on the side gets fucked over more".

Small independent creators are not necessarily so vulnerable, assuming that 100% of all materials in their products are created by themselves, not relying on any source at all, including  Even in very bad cases, it is very rare for a stolen work to have a larger number of viewers.

[thach958]

24 minutes ago, Poinkachu said:

If you think "The most important thing is the ability to win the hearts of fans", then you shouldn't shy away from creating your original characters. No?

What I still admit is that this will probably be the platform that many people want to "steal", regardless of whether they write the "origin" or not.

There will be people who cry because they see it being stolen, but I see this as an inevitability coming from a series of consequences that everything is still going on and operating at the present time.

Edited September 12, 2023 by thach958

[Poinkachu]

20 minutes ago, thach958 said:

Small independent creators are not necessarily so vulnerable, assuming that 100% of all materials in their products are created by themselves, not relying on any source at all, including  Even in very bad cases, it is very rare for a stolen work to have a larger number of viewers.

I doubt that. Yeah they MIGHT be not so vulnerable right now, how if there's a big not so obscure platform where basically stealing and publishing other's IP is allowed & probably encouraged so that they can make money out of it though ?

If you're about to insist it's true, a detailed testing needs to be done.

 

Why do you think some artist put watermarks ? Heck, why do you think some sellers on online marketplace put watermark on their product pic ?

Why do you think some artist doesn't publish something they were hired to make on their webpage , not even a glimpse ?

Why do you think some only posts a low resolution version eventhough they know they have and can put up the 4k version ?

 

IMHO, You don't think what I said a big issue because you know the thing you want to make is a remodel or just recolor, or straight up the very same.

 

Hell, I even got somewhat miffed when I found out someone in the design section of the printing company where I usually order printed banners from used one of my design as a template without asking my permission first.

[05032-Mendicant-Bias]

5 hours ago, Kisai said:

So going right back to why I made this reply, we are on the cusp of the loss of "authenticity" because existing platforms such as youtube and tiktok have a perverse incentive to allow people to make fake content to earn ad revenue. What needs to change, is that authentic content needs to be discovered and not displaced by counterfeits.

You put thought into this, but it's kinda of wasted for the scope of this conversation. Anything blockchain based should be dismissed outright as a fraud, I believe even entertaining the thought a blockchain could have a non fraudolent use after fifteen year of 100.0% fraudolent use, is playing ball with fraudsters. Maybe one day one will make a blockchain products that is not a fraud and is better than existing technologies. I say to blockchain developers: "put up or shut up" no more asking for money before delivering a good product.

I wouldn't worry about Youtube and Tik Tok. Being for profit entities, the platforms will improve their algorithms to keep viewers engaged, because if they don't, AD revenue will dry up. The one thing I trust corpos to do is to keep the dollars flowing, and recycled bottom of the barrel content is not how you retain any audience other than toddlers.

[Kisai]

17 minutes ago, 05032-Mendicant-Bias said:

You put thought into this, but it's kinda of wasted for the scope of this conversation. Anything blockchain based should be dismissed outright as a fraud, I believe even entertaining the thought a blockchain could have a non fraudolent use after fifteen year of 100.0% fraudolent use, is playing ball with fraudsters. Maybe one day one will make a blockchain products that is not a fraud and is better than existing technologies. I say to blockchain developers: "put up or shut up" no more asking for money before delivering a good product.

 

The problem is nearly every argument about block chain goes back to a distributed ledger, but that ledger is made completely irrelevant if nobody cares about it. Like let's take a blunt example, What is to stop me from taking every LMG video, run it through an AI voice filter, and a bit crusher and re-uploading it as 8-bit Nerd Videos. It's clearly transformed enough to defeat the AI algorithms on youtube, but anyone who has seen a LMG video would eventually catch on when they start seeing the same audio presented in the same way, regardless of how it's translated.

 

Every time I experiment with AI, I always come to this defeatist position of that nobody would use this for good, no matter what best intentions were made with it. AI singing is simply pushing the original singer's voice through a fancy autotune. It still requires the original song and singer to exist, and calling it a cover is about as creative as calling a greyscale photocopy of color photo an original work. It's still 100% the original work, only now it's been "night-core"'d perfectly.

 

 

17 minutes ago, 05032-Mendicant-Bias said:

I wouldn't worry about Youtube and Tik Tok. Being for profit entities, the platforms will improve their algorithms to keep viewers engaged, because if they don't, AD revenue will dry up. The one thing I trust corpos to do is to keep the dollars flowing, and recycled bottom of the barrel content is not how you retain any audience other than toddlers.

 

Nah, it's just that I've seen down the well of the AI-produced content, and basically any platform that allows AI content to be used without labeling it as such, starts getting drowned by low quality material that it actively impairs the platform.

 

Good news: We are getting a lot more content!

Bad news: It's content we already have, but pitched up 1 semitone.