• bc93@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    I don’t think you really know what you’re talking about. Assuming a 1gbps network connection I could quite easily stream 4k video to dozens of people from a laptop, easily. Why do you think that would be difficult? Where would the bottleneck be?

    • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      You must not want a youtube competitor then, if your goal is to just okay-ly stream to just a couple dozen or so people.

      • bc93@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        the guy you were responding to was talking about a distributed network, and I’m assuming he was thinking about hosting an instance on his laptop for himself, not something that was intended to single handedly replace all of youtube? but either way that wasn’t me so I dunno why you replied like I said it

        • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          You are correct. Nearly all youtube channels can be fully served off a single laptop. 260 concurrent streams at 1080p 3mbps is achievable over gigabit ethernet. Very few channels exceed this for any appreciable amount of time. And in those cases we can leverage a very small amount of the client’s ressources to further propagate the stream. This can be done with repurposed bittorrent dht. Now all we need is federated RSS and a locally running content curation algorithm and a social review system (like buttons and reputation history)