https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp
https://github.com/ytdl-org/youtube-dl
Will also start to feel the impact. My theory is that we will see a bunch of new video hosting sites as youtube itself attempts to lock down its ecosystem. They haven't paid attention in any adversarial way as far as I can tell.
When they do, it wont be great.
If so, that could signal the start of the end for yt-dlp and similar.
Or at least for their hosting on public GitHub and similar places.
i doubt that.
The business of hosting video is not the hosting itself. It's the ad-driven revenue you can derive, which requires eyeballs first.
Youtube's eyeball count is through the roof compared to any new video hosting site. Content creators will not switch off youtube, unless their revenue from this new site is sufficient compared to what they could've gotten from youtube (or they mirror it - in which case, why would anyone go to this new site?).
"Content creators will not switch off youtube, unless their revenue from this new site is sufficient compared to what they could've gotten from youtube (or they mirror it - in which case, why would anyone go to this new site?). "
There are alternatives (e.g. Nebula) and a lot of creators like them and do post their content on them to get a higher revenue share. Youtube is squeezing a lot of them. You tube is also a pretty crap user experience too.
There are also people whose videos are primarily not being found through Youtube, and those are not looking for ad revenues. There are also other business models than a revenue share from Youtube.
The competition that youtube gets is from tiktok, not clones of youtube.
There is hope of it changing slowly.
But, really, it is just part of the centralised internet we now have.
Yes but... (1) Nebula "success" is partially owed to Nebula creators building up audiences on Youtube.
And (2) being on Nebula requires an invitation from that platform to join. You can't just be a random unknown. In contrast, you can be an new unknown creator and start uploading videos to Youtube. Then later, if you're big enough and the quality meets Nebula's standards, they may ask you to join.[1]
Those 2 reasons keep it from being a true "alternative" to Youtube. Nebula is more of an extension platform for the portion of audiences that want to pay extra for longer-form videos of their favorite Youtube creators that happen to be on Nebula.
There are also lots of high-quality Youtube creators (e.g. DIY repair tutorials, etc) who are not on Nebula because it doesn't fit Nebula's "documentary" type of content.
[1] Nebula CEO: >If somebody comes to me and says, “Hey, I’m friends with the creator of this channel and they do really good stuff. I think they would be a good fit,” I will take the call. If I get a cold email from a YouTuber saying, “Hey, I have 100,000 subscribers and I want to be on Nebula,” I don’t reply. : https://www.theverge.com/23076663/nebula-youtube-creator-bus...
Like submitting a new website to multiple places.
I think it's difficult by design. The platforms don't want that, they want the lock-in and switching costs.
seeding other platforms with your content that was meant to be youtube is fine (i'm sure there are tools that could do this already), but the problem is that those new platforms aren't monetized like youtube is.
For a content creator, if they dilute their audience (by saying that their content is available on some other platform), they might have less views on youtube which is the money maker.
ETA: Accessing content on nebula, I have my feed of videos from the creators to which I subscribe and I select videos to watch from there. It's basic but as someone who never got into watching youtube (I bookmarked channels on invidious instances and looked for new videos there) it's pretty good. They're also open to feature requests and are improving the site.