this post was submitted on 06 Dec 2024
606 points (98.6% liked)
Technology
60059 readers
3333 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Companies or creators can run their own instance can't they?
AFAIK, it's still not had the code released, so at the moment there's just the one site and you can't host your own.
They can. And if at any point it becomes untenable, you can just archive whatever you host, shut down your instance, and put the videos up for download somewhere.
If a company is going bankrupt as a result of hosting a video service, they're not going to be able to afford to archive and make it available for download either.
Archive storage is relatively cheap. It’s the bandwidth and compute required to serve video that is expensive
Could you explain that idea in more detail? I'm not really sure I understand how that would work in practice.
Gotcha.
The idea of a large public instance rubs me the wrong way, since it leads to behavior like that.