The thing that worries me the most about YouTube as a creation platform is the idea that if your subscriber delta begins to go down, you are bad. Rather than being able to just, make a thing.
Jonathan Lamothe mastodon (AP)
This is one of the reasons I like PeerTube. I can just make shit for the sake of making it. I don't have to care about being beholden to the algorithm.
Definitely! And that is important to me. I want that internet back. BUT

Youtube set a standard that people can get paid for making internet video, which is great and good, but it's also complicated. It means that anything that is gonna replace youtube's cultural footprint is also gonna need to require paying.

The issue is that PeerTube and its ilk doesn't have a space to pay people without philanthropy or donations. I obviously am hoping that small-scale donations will cover this growing thing, but there's not a lot of good open payment services. And with Patreon being crushed under the weight of their own VC money, and YouTube and Twitch allowing Memberships, off-platform donations seem like a major problem with value to solving.

Things like Nebula of course want to be the solution, and I think that there's a space for a focused streaming service of independent content, and I really would prefer that, but there's also something to be said for the scrappy DIY nature of early youtube (early being like 2010-15 in my mind, when the platform isn't so new it's barely functional, but not its current form, this isn't a statement that that time period was better or good, it's just me trying to communicate an idea).

Similarly, there's also like, the way in which youtube culture is moving toward children's entertainment by people whom I would really rather not be advertising to my kids. Like the 80s cartoon boom, it turns out kids will consume a lot of low effort content, and are very vulnerable to advertising, and therefore we have these channels being advertising juggernauts to prey on kids, and the fact that huge portions of youtube are that. And then the youtube rules pushing every channel toward that, because of the fact that the more you sanitize every video, the less likely parents are to stop their kids watching.

I want more experimental content, I want more video essays, I want more amateur songs, I want more VLOGs, and I want so much more of this stuff. And I think, long term, PeerTube is the correct tool for this. But I also think that, there's some sort of space that needs to be handled.
Jonathan Lamothe mastodon (AP)
Absolutely. If I were trying to make a living off of my content, I'd certainly have to think long and hard about whether PeerTube was the right platform for me. Fortunately, at present I'm doing this all for shits and giggles, so I have the luxury of not having to worry about any of that.

I'd like to see a better solution for those cases, but I have no idea what it would look like. As you point out, it's not an easy problem to solve.
And like, something like Patreon is the answer. But I am very worried about Patreon's future and present
Jonathan Lamothe mastodon (AP)
and even if Patreon or something like it were to fill that gap, you still need to get enough eyeballs in your content for it to work anyways. At present the reach of the fediverse of dwarfed by the major centralized services like YouTube.
Honestly, I am a lot less worried about that in the short term. It's possible to build a following of *thousands* in the fediverse. And hopefully those are more-likely-to-pay-you audience. At least, in theory. Being able to get a better people paying you, and not just people being shoved content by an AI that has its own agenda.

If we can decouple money from content, and then build systems with payment and content, we can, I hope, build a better world.
Jonathan Lamothe mastodon (AP)
Chris Were made a good point about this. Paying content creators directly seems like a good idea in theory. I'd love to do that. The problem is that there are so many good creators out there that I enjoy that even if I were to contribute to each of them, it'd add up pretty quickly to the point where I simply couldn't afford it.

I kind of like the model Flattr adopted back in the day, but I don't know what became of them. Are they even still around?

Jonathan Lamothe mastodon (AP)
The thing that was nice about YouTube's ad revenue system was that it made it so that the creator's audience were no longer directly responsible for the creator's revenue stream. Unfortunately, Google really does seem to have done away with the old "don't be evil" mantra.

Yeah, I can't easily afford all the creators I want to give money, even if I only gave a dollar.

I think Flatter might still exist. But it's definitely not a thing people are using and that does suck.

I wish we had better tools, and no profit motive
Jonathan Lamothe mastodon (AP)
I think the real problem lies in assigning as single company as the gatekeeper for these sorts of (financial) things. This was one of the things that I really liked about Bitcoin, not it's not without a host of other problems now.
I think it's also hard because it's hard to engage when it's a corporation. But also just, creator has become a job, and it removes a lot of the ways that works.
Jonathan Lamothe mastodon (AP)
I had a look, and apparently Flattr still exists and has a browser extension that tracks your usage and divvies up the donation based on that (you can override, however).

I don't think I like the privacy implications of that.
Oh, yeah, I liked the click a button model

I also dislike the Brave model