Hacker News Reader

Comment by octosphere | Hacker News Reader

I loathe the way Youtube is this big gatekeeper and can make arbitrary decisions on what is/isn't allowed. We need to build alternatives to Youtube which are not subject to arbitrary interference.

View on HN

There are alternatives: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_hosting_services. The issue is that those platforms don't pay much of anything either.

You could almost think of say, reddit, as a crowdsourced index bolted onto the front of YouTube. In other words don’t use YouTube itself for discovery, use specific subreddits for initial discovery.

Edit: I left out the part where you could probably add monetizatuon outside of YouTube

Reddit is not fully crowdsourced. Not every upvote is equal, and the algorithm that rules those is closed.

I don't even think it's Youtube. It's the advertisers dictating what should and shouldn't be in videos, and I think Youtube is being a bit over-zealous in marking these keywords.

But of course it's """""the algorithms fault""""".

Maybe if this algorithm isn't doing it's job properly and you can't think of (or afford) other methods to administrate your content, you shouldn't be able to host it in the first place.

> you shouldn't be able to host it in the first place.

This is seriously your argument?

What are you even saying, that laws should exist that say that if youtube can't perfectly accurately categorize the 300 hours of video that are uploaded every minute, then youtube should be barred from hosting any videos?

That's what things like Patreon are for. It's a third party monetization platform.

Until you get deplatformed like Gab did by payment processors, hosting providers, cdns and more.

What can we do to mitigate these gatekeepers?

That sounds good in theory, but I'd bet a free speech alternative to YouTube would become a hotbed for hate.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com