Talented developer for sure, but has a knack for developing software that piggy backs of silicon valley giants that can turn off access at a moments notice.
https://mastodon.social/@UP8/111049822586450100
30 years ago somebody who wanted to develop a "new object you can use to distribute music" had to spend $100 million on some project like
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Compact_Cassette
today it is very simple because almost everyone has a player in their pocket that connects the card to software which runs in the cloud. It wouldn't be technically difficult at all for me to host the music file in S3, R2 or Azure storage and the storage and network costs are insignificant so far as I expect these cards to be distributed. If I did that I could get in trouble over copyright, so a link to YouTube is a safe and easy solution w/ the disadvantage that people in many geographies can't view licensed music videos.
Fortunately that QR code is a redirect and I can send it to another service. I demoed the cards with quite a few people and found that they usually felt it was a letdown to go to YouTube (maybe because they go to YouTube all the time and there is nothing special about it) but that there was more satisfaction with a link to SongWhip which might send them to YouTUbe in the end but gives them a feeling of agency at the expense of another click.
From the 1960s-80s magazines came with "flexidiscs" which could play entire songs.
I make all sorts of small apps and utilities because to improve usability of services i consume. It doest mean I'm some lackey to big corp.
It's the copyright that's the problem. You would be annihilated, not by YouTube's lawyers, but by UMG and Sony's lawyers, immediately after getting even a small amount of traction.
Nobody would care about Youtube if it wasn't seeded with millions of movie clips and music videos years before the copyright holders got their act together.
Peertube is one distributed option[0].
Many content creators have started hosting videos on other services like Patreon because of Youtube's censorship and demonetization policies. Which doesn't entirely avoid the centralization problem but it's better not to put all of your eggs in one basket.
It's also possible (although obviously not always feasible) to self-host or torrent.
I can't see how you can avoid the centralization problem and also have decent monetization for the videos. But I want to certainly become convinced that it can work. Crypto made me a decentralization skeptic.
X.com is also trying to enter the space by hosting longer videos and allowing accounts to earn ad revenue as well as building a subscriber base who can support creators directly. It's not half bad.
Full disclaimer:
I think it might be implied, but there's certainly a lot of political distaste around these platforms since they finally freed themselves from the shackles of government-aided censorship, and takedowns that are heavily biased towards promoting progressive views (especially radical).
With that said, everyone please refrain from attacking this reply for merely mentioning these platforms as options, as they are equally valid ways to build a following and/or monetize your content, even if they support creators who run against your own views. As they say, diversity is our strength!
Most devs work on projects that don’t actively compete with large companies on their own ground.
Or do you mean alternative to watching video on Vision - I suppose youtube still works via safari, is that not the case?
But sure, if that’s not enough and you need a clone of youtube then yes, you need to develop a new youtube.
Ie work in a way that doesn't require the giants shadow, as the giant may move unexpectedly. The shade can be quite lucrative though, if you're nimble.
Anyway YouTube aren’t going to disable embeds. So don’t see it being turned off
Anything that isn't a client to proprietary platforms?