Speaking of enshittification… why just post a youtube video with zero explanation of the content?
Original source with options for video and audio downloads, independent from YouTube.
Yeah… the very fact this is posted as a youtube video reinforces the point of how far we are from this. The issue is, the enshitified internet is not a technology problem… it’s an education/people problem.
The internet will not be better until people are.
Oh it definatly is a technology problem though. There well never be a federated Youtube for instance. Think about that the storage that Google uses since videos are not really deleted, and the bandwidth to server that much video. It doens’t really scale with federation.
There well never be a federated Youtube for instance. Think about that the storage that Google uses since videos are not really deleted, and the bandwidth to server that much video.
Until there is. Someday someone will create a PeerTube plugin or some other piece of software that will tackle this. I’m thinking distributed storage, automatic mirroring to other instances when more bandwidth is needed for a popular video, voluntary storage donation from clients (got 10GB of expendable storage on your device? Donate it to the network), or something I can’t even think of. There are so many possibilities in this space. I won’t accept that it’ll never be possible.
I watched the first 10-15 minutes of this and have to say, while I agree with him on principle, he’s either misinformed or exaggerating the anti-circumvention regulation. There are a number of exemptions in anti-circumvention laws in the US for personal use. How far this goes was made clear in court, Apple took the creators of an iOS jailbreak to court and lost, making it clear that jailbreaking is not illegal, even though it clearly circumvents the “protection” system in place. Similar applies to circumventing DRM for backup copies of media, for instance.
Of course, I would rather see no anti-circumvention legislation whatsoever, but the way he misportrays the situation makes me question his credibility.
for personal use
A key part of his argument is that these laws should be repealed so that small companies could legally develop hacks and alternatives. For example a startup could develop (and support) an alternative firmware for John Deere tractors, which they sell to independent tractor repair shops around the world, creating more competition, more options, and cheaper/better services to end users. The “for personal use” version of that is fine for us hobbyists, but prevents similar freedoms from being accessible to regular people.
