Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    IMG_0001

    (walzr.com)
    1570 points walz | 21 comments | 04 Dec 24 04:46 UTC | HN request time: 0.647s | source | bottom
    Show context
    kannonboy ◴[04 Dec 24 06:05 UTC] No.42314852[source]▶
    I love that the view count is included in the minimalist UI. I came across one with zero views, and there's something so intimate and exciting about being the first person to watch an ancient home video (even if it's shaky handycam footage of a horse, narrated in Russian).

    As an aside, hats off to Google to being able to serve an 11 year old video with no noticeable delay from what must be the coldest of caches.

    replies(6): >>42315729 #>>42316104 #>>42316775 #>>42320216 #>>42320625 #>>42321956 #
    1. hoseja ◴[04 Dec 24 09:03 UTC] No.42315729[source]▶
    I'm really anxious Google will also kill this aspect of Youtube one day.
    replies(6): >>42315994 #>>42316132 #>>42316418 #>>42317176 #>>42317267 #>>42322623 #
    2. supermatt ◴[04 Dec 24 09:54 UTC] No.42315994[source]▶
    As soon as it gets split off from google and they no longer have the money machine to fund them and have to fight on a level regulatory-monitored ground for ad revenue you can bet your ass it will.
    replies(1): >>42316207 #
    3. joelkoen ◴[04 Dec 24 10:21 UTC] No.42316132[source]▶
    Anyone aware of public archives of videos like this? These are so cool and I imagine that in the future this would be an incredibly valuable peek into history given how raw it is.
    replies(1): >>42317633 #
    4. Mashimo ◴[04 Dec 24 10:34 UTC] No.42316207[source]▶
    AFAIK youtube is profitable now. It was not for years, but is now.
    replies(4): >>42316421 #>>42316896 #>>42317855 #>>42320130 #
    5. kristopolous ◴[04 Dec 24 11:15 UTC] No.42316418[source]▶
    Google: if you like it, it's going away.
    replies(2): >>42317524 #>>42317883 #
    6. eru ◴[04 Dec 24 11:15 UTC] No.42316421{3}[source]▶
    Yes, but it could perhaps be more profitable, if they cut spending on this aspect?
    replies(1): >>42316674 #
    7. whereismyacc ◴[04 Dec 24 12:06 UTC] No.42316674{4}[source]▶
    For every year that passes, storage becomes cheaper, but the total size of youtube's video repository grows. I wonder what the net effect of all that is in the end. Ever increasing costs? Or maybe it kinda evens out.
    replies(2): >>42317201 #>>42318701 #
    8. iamgopal ◴[04 Dec 24 12:44 UTC] No.42316896{3}[source]▶
    What could be cost of total storage of YouTube ? Edit : About billion USD per year.
    9. ThrowawayTestr ◴[04 Dec 24 13:22 UTC] No.42317176[source]▶
    You should get YouTube Premium so they can pay for all those servers.
    10. ◴[04 Dec 24 13:25 UTC] No.42317201{5}[source]▶
    11. pohuing ◴[04 Dec 24 13:33 UTC] No.42317267[source]▶
    They've already announced deleting videos from unused channels. So it's only a matter of time
    replies(1): >>42318754 #
    12. supportengineer ◴[04 Dec 24 14:05 UTC] No.42317524[source]▶
    Once you live to a certain age, you realize this is true about everything in your life.
    replies(1): >>42320713 #
    13. thesuitonym ◴[04 Dec 24 14:20 UTC] No.42317633[source]▶
    https://archive.org/details/movies?tab=collection
    14. b3lvedere ◴[04 Dec 24 14:40 UTC] No.42317855{3}[source]▶
    Since when did that stop shareholders to make even more money?
    15. seanw265 ◴[04 Dec 24 14:42 UTC] No.42317883[source]▶
    I got charged by Squarespace the other day, and it immediately raised red flags—I've never done business with them before.

    Then it clicked: this was for an old domain I’d purchased through Google Domains. I knew Google had sold its domain business to Squarespace, but in the moment, I’d completely forgotten about it.

    Oh well.

    16. eru ◴[04 Dec 24 15:55 UTC] No.42318701{5}[source]▶
    Interestingly, if storage cost decreases geometrically over time, then the total storage cost of storing a video for all eternity is finite.

    Though what I was commenting on here wasn't so much the cost of storing a video at all, but storing it in 'warm' enough storage that you can load it really quickly.

    17. lelandfe ◴[04 Dec 24 16:00 UTC] No.42318754[source]▶
    https://techcrunch.com/2023/05/18/youtube-will-no-longer-be-...

    > Google updated the post to read, “We do not have plans to delete accounts with YouTube videos at this time.”

    replies(1): >>42322559 #
    18. dnissley ◴[04 Dec 24 18:03 UTC] No.42320130{3}[source]▶
    Can you post your source? Last time I checked (and quickly checking around now) I didn't see any announcement from Google about Youtube being profitable.
    19. kristopolous ◴[04 Dec 24 18:58 UTC] No.42320713{3}[source]▶
    I'm increasingly thinking of customer product relations in terms of giving treats to your users.

    The moat and stickiness concepts are ok, but "candy store" is more fruitful.

    Of course what constitutes candy is different for every product and you need to understand your customers to know what "flavors" they want

    20. pohuing ◴[04 Dec 24 22:06 UTC] No.42322559{3}[source]▶
    Thanks, finally some good news from them for once
    21. BlueTemplar ◴[04 Dec 24 22:13 UTC] No.42322623[source]▶
    It was already partially killed when in 2017 YouTube switched all unlisted videos to private.

    Which I now just realize why they did that : a lot of people didn't understand the difference.

    Sadly, a lot of other people did understand the difference, and did not expect this kind of switcheroo, and now there's a bunch of effectively dead links covering more than a decade of videos.