Technology

hideshow 10 child comments

parent

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 1 point 5 months ago* (9 children)

Because of the network effect, he'd have to spend billions to get enough infrastructure for his streaming service to be able to compete with YouTube and Twitch. Because people go where the content is, so a majority of content creators would have to start using it, rather than just himself.

Until that, it's like Epic Games Store. They keep giving away free games and STILL nobody wants to go there because all their games are already on Steam. Doesn't help that their launcher is shit too, but even if it wasn't, most people wouldn't move over.

hideshow 9 child comments

parent

[–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 5 months ago* (8 children)

he’d have to spend billions to get enough infrastructure for his streaming service to be able to compete with YouTube and Twitch

I was not at all suggesting that he enter the business of livestreaming...

Because people go where the content is, so a majority of content creators would have to start using it, rather than just himself.

"Where the content is" is owned by one of the richest tech billionaires in the world. One who is responsible for the destruction of more small businesses than anyone on the planet. One who bribed the President on several occasions, including with the ballroom, and with a $28M check. And I'm sure many other avenues.

As long as we continue going "where the content is" and refusing to go anywhere else, that's where it will remain in perpetuity. Someone has to have the influence and the courage to make the content be somewhere else.

Until that, it’s like Epic Games Store. They keep giving away free games and STILL nobody wants to go there because all their games are already on Steam.

That's not why at all. That's because their platform sucks ass.

hideshow 8 child comments

parent

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 1 point 5 months ago (7 children)

I was not at all suggesting that he enter the business of livestreaming…

See, the thing is, if whatever alternative platform he uses (which you proposed could be his own website) can't facilitate a bunch of other creators moving over, then his effort is useless against the whole issue of Twitch, and only serves to make fewer people watch him. And to be fair, he's not just streaming it on Twitch, he's also doing it on YouTube, TikTok and several other shitty corporate platforms, because that's where people are. At least you get a choice of which one to use, even if they all suck.

People don't want to have to use 10 different platforms to follow the stuff they're interested in. They want their one platform to show most of the content, and the content that's not there might as well be ignored. Now if you had Mamdani, and several other people that some particular viewer cares about, all on one alternative platform, that would be enough for that person to consider watching content on two or three platforms, I'm sure. But nobody's going to type an URL into their browser just for one politician in 2026. That's how fucked we are as a society.

As long as we continue going “where the content is” and refusing to go anywhere else, that’s where it will remain in perpetuity. Someone has to have the influence and the courage to make the content be somewhere else.

I fully agree, but it doesn't help unless there's enough content "somewhere else" and "somewhere else" isn't "different service for every streamer and politician". The reason something like Nebula works is that a whole lot of content creators got together. And they pretty much all still upload to YouTube too, because they need the money - they still get the majority of their views from there, despite offering exclusive content and early access on Nebula. Now Nebula is paid so it has a higher barrier to entry for viewers, but it's ad free and slop free.

You and I might go visit Mamdani's website if he decides to stream on there, but millions of others will not, and he needs to reach them too. Personally, I'm not even the audience he needs to reach. I don't live in the US, let alone NYC.

Personally I think he should also stream it here, but not get rid of the other alternatives just yet. And advertise that more prominently than Twitch or YouTube. Clearly he's already doing multistreaming, it would be great if he could add a non-corporate platform as an alternative. He could also read comments from all platforms rather than just Twitch because there's technology for that too, though it depends on what his solution is (not like a streaming software solution is super hard to replace though).

That’s not why at all. That’s because their platform sucks ass.

I acknowledged that, but there are tons of gamers who outright refuse to entertain the idea of using it even if it was good.

GOG doesn't suck at all, and sees much smaller sales numbers than Steam for games that are listed on both. I know I'm personally guilty of buying CP2077 on Steam rather than GOG (despite the fact that I could still use Proton for the GOG version).

hideshow 7 child comments

parent

[–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 5 months ago (6 children)

if whatever alternative platform he uses (which you proposed could be his own website) can’t facilitate a bunch of other creators moving over, then his effort is useless against the whole issue of Twitch

...no? It isn't. He doesn't have to support anyone else in order to not support Twitch.

Other than that, I would recommend checking out the Owncast directory to see how a federated streaming network can work. Or even look at the current state of podcasts and just apply that logic to streaming.

People don’t want to have to use 10 different platforms to follow the stuff they’re interested in. They want their one platform to show most of the content

The only reason that doesn't already exist is because Big Tech doesn't want it to. They could all turn on Federation and make that a reality tomorrow. Again, I refer you to The Owncast directory to see what that future could look like.

I fully agree, but it doesn’t help unless there’s enough content “somewhere else”

Once again, chicken and egg. There will never be content somewhere else until someone puts it there.

GOG doesn’t suck at all, and sees much smaller sales numbers than Steam

That's because they only have DRM-free content, which means they have ~1\1000th of Steam's library, if that.

Personally I don't buy from them because they don't support Linux/Proton, even though they totally could. So I have to choose between free games or a free OS.

hideshow 6 child comments

parent

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 1 point 5 months ago (5 children)

…no? It isn’t. He doesn’t have to support anyone else in order to not support Twitch.

Him alone supporting or not supporting Twitch means absolutely nothing for Twitch, but quite a bit for his viewership. Just moving one creator off the biggest platform accomplishes nothing.

The only reason that doesn’t already exist is because Big Tech doesn’t want it to

And I don't see a universe where Big Tech is going to change its' tune either unfortunately.

Or even look at the current state of podcasts and just apply that logic to streaming.

Basically every podcast is available on Spotify and Apple Podcasts, some of the major ones also on YouTube. How's that different from streaming?

Once again, chicken and egg. There will never be content somewhere else until someone puts it there.

And I'm saying there's no point unless it's a coordinated effort. A single creator being unavailable on Twitch changes nothing, except that single streamer's visibility. It would have to be a ton of people streaming outside of the mainstream platforms for people to forget about Twitch.

That’s because they only have DRM-free content, which means they have ~1\1000th of Steam’s library, if that.

Aye, but even games they DO have, they sell less than Steam, despite offering a technically superior product (DRM-free).

Personally I don’t buy from them because they don’t support Linux/Proton

Their website runs fine on Firefox on Linux and you can use any number of utilities to run games with Proton and manage prefixes, such as Bottles, umu, etc. Heroic even provides a unifying launcher for GOG and a few other windows-only stores. Are you saying the convenience of the more proprietary platform is keeping you from using the less proprietary one? You can see how it's the same for 99% of humanity and corporate streaming services, right? The competing service needs to win on multiple points to overcome the convenience and familiarity of the existing.

hideshow 5 child comments

parent

[–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 5 months ago (4 children)

Just moving one creator off the biggest platform accomplishes nothing.

We've already discussed several times precisely how it does. If you don't agree, that's fine, but you can stop repeating the same nonsense over and over.

And I don’t see a universe where Big Tech is going to change its’ tune either unfortunately.

Not as long as people like you continue to advocate against it.

Basically every podcast is available on Spotify and Apple Podcasts, some of the major ones also on YouTube. How’s that different from streaming?

Because they're also available without them. And YouTube does not have podcasts.

And I’m saying there’s no point unless it’s a coordinated effort. A single creator being unavailable on Twitch changes nothing, except that single streamer’s visibility

Brother you can't just start at 5 million. Everything starts at one. Fortunately there are already hundreds, but none of them as influential as the mayor of NYC.

Their website runs fine on Firefox

I don't care about their website. I want a client where I click a button and the game launches.

Heroic even provides a unifying launcher for GOG

It only works like 10% of the time. While Steam works 99%. Even when it works it doesn't support a bunch of features that GOG desktop does.

Are you saying the convenience of the more proprietary platform is keeping you from using the less proprietary one?

No I'm saying one supports free operating systems and the other doesn't.

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 1 point 5 months ago (3 children)

We’ve already discussed several times precisely how it does. If you don’t agree, that’s fine, but you can stop repeating the same nonsense over and over.

Okay, tell me how many people are going to stop using Twitch because one single streamer streams elsewhere?

Not as long as people like you continue to advocate against it.

Yes, I'm the reason big tech wants to make more money, not because they like making money.

Because they’re also available without them

Yes, and this stream is also available on platforms that are not Twitch. Similarly to how everyone still gets their podcasts off Spotify or Apple Podcasts because those have all the podcasts, everyone will still stream on Twitch if all their other content is still on Twitch too.

And YouTube does not have podcasts.

Sure, YouTube doesn't have podcasts.

Brother you can’t just start at 5 million. Everything starts at one. Fortunately there are already hundreds, but none of them as influential as the mayor of NYC.

And which app or website can you go to to see all of those hundreds in one place?

I don’t care about their website. I want a client where I click a button and the game launches.

So you want convenience and it's worth more to you than your game being DRM-free. This is literally why every game dev still sells on Steam instead of delisting and going exclusively to GOG and itch. And it's why nobody who streams will take their stream off Twitch. Because of people like you, who want the convenience of going on Twitch and just clicking.

It only works like 10% of the time. While Steam works 99%. Even when it works it doesn’t support a bunch of features that GOG desktop does.

You don't NEED any features other than "launch game". Some apps I can suggest for this: Konsole, alacritty, cosmic-term

No I’m saying one supports free operating systems and the other doesn’t.

But GOG supports free operating systems. The client is completely optional and it came several years after the website which supports every modern browser and OS. Not supporting free operating systems is an imaginary issue you're making up to justify NOT LEAVING THE CONVENIENT CORPORATE PLATFORM THAT HAS ALL YOUR CONTENT IN ONE PLACE. If you really cared, you could also run the GOG client with Wine just like you run the games themselves.

hideshow 3 child comments

parent

[–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 5 months ago (2 children)

tell me how many people are going to stop using Twitch because one single streamer streams elsewhere?

It doesn't matter how many times you ask this leading question, I'm not repeating myself. Scroll up. This conversation is never going to make sense to you if you're unable to understand the simple concept of a transition.

I’m the reason big tech wants to make more money, not because they like making money.

No, people like you are the reason they will continue making money. People who actively advocate against alternatives.

Yes, and this stream is also available on platforms that are not Twitch.

Only if they elect to multistream them to those platforms. Every other platform he's streaming it to is ALSO Big Tech. Podcasts are distributed via an open protocol called RSS and you can listen to them however you want, without any platforms involved at all.

Sure, YouTube doesn’t have podcasts.

Can you link me to the RSS feed for these "podcasts"? No? Then they're not podcasts.

And which app or website can you go to to see all of those hundreds in one place?

Once again, already discussed above. If you're just not going to read my responses, I'm going to stop writing them.

So you want convenience and it’s worth more to you than your game being DRM-free.

It doesn't matter if its DRM-free or not if it DOESN'T WORK.

Some apps I can suggest for this: Konsole, alacritty, cosmic-term

These are not "apps", they are terminal emulators, and they obviously don't solve the problem I'm describing.

But GOG supports free operating systems.

I would to hear how you describe this. They have zero Linux software whatsoever. And they don't support Proton, even though they absolutely could.

If you really cared, you could also run the GOG client with Wine just like you run the games themselves.

That's very obviously would simply not work.

hideshow 2 child comments

parent

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 1 point 5 months ago (1 child)

No, people like you are the reason they will continue making money. People who actively advocate against alternatives.

I'm not advocating against alternatives, I'm saying there's no point in dropping your visibility to zero if there's not at least a semi-viable alternative to unify under.

You're just being obtuse on purpose.

Can you link me to the RSS feed for these “podcasts”? No? Then they’re not podcasts.

Nearly nobody uses RSS readers these days, people get their podcasts on other apps. The RSS feed isn't a defining feature of podcasts anymore and many of the biggest podcasts no longer use it. Out of the ones I linked, the smallest (and by far the best) one, Cortex, still has an official RSS Feed. Now show me a podcast with significant followership that does not host their content on Spotify, Apple or YouTube and is only available via the RSS feed.

It doesn’t matter if its DRM-free or not if it DOESN’T WORK.

What doesn't? Most GOG games seem to work just fine on Linux. Heroic Launcher? Idk, I don't use it much, it's unnecessary for GOG anyway, it's only really necessary for Epic which doesn't have download links on the website (I suppose you COULD also curl the games, but that requires more setup than most people would want to do, with cookies and everything)

These are not “apps”, they are terminal emulators, and they obviously don’t solve the problem I’m describing.

Open terminal, umu-run ~/games/some_game/some_game.exe. You can even use tab to auto complete parts of the path.

Done. Game's running, faster than any big GUI launcher opens, whether it be Steam, or GOG Galaxy.

That’s very obviously would simply not work.

Why's that? It's literally how I played Assassin's Creed, except it was uplay rather than GOG Galaxy.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I’m not advocating against alternatives, I’m saying there’s no point in dropping your visibility to zero

When you say that, that's exactly what you're doing. And it is not true, either.

Nearly nobody uses RSS readers these days, people get their podcasts on other apps.

What do you mean "other apps"? Every podcast app is an "RSS reader". How do you think people listen to Spotify podcasts from the Apple podcasts app, and vise versa? You should really educate yourself more on how this works. You do not have to upload your podcast to Apple to be visible on Apple.

The RSS feed isn’t a defining feature of podcasts anymore

It is quite literally the only defining feature, other than containing audio/video media.

and many of the biggest podcasts no longer use it.

Then they're not podcasts.

Now show me a podcast with significant followership that does not host their content on Spotify, Apple or YouTube and is only available via the RSS feed.

Where they're hosted is not relevant. Every podcast with an RSS feed is available on Apple and Spotify apps. 100.0000% of them. Along with any and every other podcast app.

What doesn’t?

GOG games on Linux.

Open terminal, umu-run ~/games/some_game/some_game.exe. You can even use tab to auto complete parts of the path. Done.

LOL this is a gross oversimplification and you know it. Its not that simple and it WILL NOT WORK. I'm not playing this game anymore.