• non_burglar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    The lift of running your own platform is big. You just won’t believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it’s a long way down the road to the chemist’s, but that’s just peanuts to creating your own video hosting platform.

    • rebelrbl@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      It’s not that challenging with a partner to help manage infrastructure which even at his scale is not going to cost an obscene amount of money.

      Edit: there’s a very massive difference between a single content creator hosting their content and a site hosting everyone’s content like YouTube as well in terms of cost, infrastructure, security and management.

    • meyotch@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      Websites work very well and are scalable af. A plugged in person with a track record like that could go Web 2.0 and probably net more.

      • non_burglar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        You are correct. Websites, the stack to supply video encoding, even scalability is a solved problem.

        The hard work isn’t technical, it’s getting people onto your platform in the first place (marketing), getting people to continue using your platform (retention) and the perennial problems of SaaS evolving with other SaaS platforms (how many dev hours are you willing to eat trying to keep up with the Joneses?).

        SaaS, and in this case, SaaS offering content, is a losing game. You will either lose your shirt, sell your business, or become entrenched in a position whose inertia is difficult to break. How much of any of those you are willing to take a firehose of is the question.