Justin.tv has more incoming video than YouTube | Hacker News Reader

Justin.tv has more incoming video than YouTube

mashable.com

33 pointsabstractbill16 comments

Yeah, the problem is they have TOO MUCH video. The s/n ratio on JTV is so high that pirated channels are the only thing worth watching. I'm sure there's some good content in there, but good luck finding it.

Their launch was brilliant (I love the concept), but they need to come up with a way to filter and summarize. I need to be able to grab 30 seconds out of a video and nominate it for the daily "Best of JTV" or something.

How about a "Something interesting is happening" button that you can toggle on/off while you're watching a video?

Discovery at this scale is a hard problem. As we get bigger, more people set up spam broadcasts too (streams with no interesting content and lots of links), which makes the job even harder. We're working on it though ;-)

Have no doubt that you are :)

For the record, we do have a way of making clips from videos that you're watching. (Maybe we need to make that feature more prominent...)

maybe there's a way you can summarize boring video into showing only the interesting chunks

We've tried to improve how people find live video feeds, at shiftpop.com.

So in other words, they have an average of 1320 feeds going at any time. That's nothing to sneeze at, but the YouTube comparison doesn't seem quite apples to apples.

The fact that Justin.tv is beating YouTube in terms of volume of content creation is at least impressive to me.

Not all content is made equal. On average, I'd say there's more than a minute's worth of effort put into each minute of video posted to YouTube. Most of the feeds on live video sites are static cameras pointed at televisions, puppies, etc. There's some effort involved in setting these things up, but it's certainly less than 1:1 with the amount of footage being uploaded.

I'm not trying to trivialize justin.tv's accomplishment, I just don't think it's a particularly useful comparison.

That's actually a really interesting metric: the amount of effort per minute of video.

A quick mental runthrough of various video sites I've used suggests this would be an effective predictor of content quality.

Indeed. Another question worth noting is, how many people are watching? The ratio of consumers to producers is big -- the fact that YouTube has people to watch all the content produced on it is what's remarkable about it.

how many people are watching?

We're getting close to half a billion pageviews per month, the majority of which are on channel pages.

http://www.quantcast.com/justin.tv

Not really, all those live cams on 24/7 are a massive amount of content. Mostly worthless content, but content nonetheless.

Quality not quantity.

I'm a big fan of Vimeo, but it's gone very buggy re: uploading.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com