I'm confident hosts would step in to make money if YouTube's monopoly on combo hosting+discovery were broken. Folks tend to like making money. No reason they couldn't put their own ads on the videos, like YouTube does, to cover costs for creators who want free hosting. All kinds of angles to provide free hosting to feed the ol' marketing funnel, just like all kinds of other hosts, like limiting quality (so, drastically reducing bandwidth costs—SD video with modern codecs can be tiny)
I find the push-back on this baffling. It's like if web hosting were all but completely controlled by one monopolist and questioning that drew all kinds of "LOL how could web hosting even work without one monopolist controlling the whole thing and dictating what can and cannot be hosted, it's impossible, you're nuts, no-one could ever start a hobby website again without that monopolist".
I'm confident hosts would step in to make money if YouTube's monopoly on combo hosting+discovery were broken. Folks tend to like making money. No reason they couldn't put their own ads on the videos, like YouTube does, to cover costs for creators who want free hosting.
Who is buying these ads on this new video site that no one is using yet?
You posit the alternative, that no-one would figure out how to make money off this market? I find that implausible. If we take that objection aside, the question looks a lot like "how does a business possibly start?" which... well, look at the site we're on.
I find the push-back on this baffling. It's like if web hosting were all but completely controlled by one monopolist and questioning that drew all kinds of "LOL how could web hosting even work without one monopolist controlling the whole thing and dictating what can and cannot be hosted, it's impossible, you're nuts, no-one could ever start a hobby website again without that monopolist".
reply