These people don't understand what a class war looks like...

So, there are options.

You have three challenges:

• You need to be discoverable

• you need to be accessible

• you need to monetize

If you just make videos and torrent them, you're not monetized, you're not discoverable and you're not really very accessable to the average person.

Youtube is this nifty one-stop-shop that provides all three to a certain point.

Peertube gives you some discoverability and lots of accessibility, but nothing for monetization.

Odysee gives you a tiny bit of discoverability and lots of accessibility, but almost nothing for monetization.

Floatplane (assuming GN wasn't feuding with LMG) gives you reasonable monetization and accessibility but almost nothing in discoverability.

edit: cut myself short

I'd like to see some form of partially federated system that works with peertube. I think the platform could scale and we could give youtube a run for their money.

Messy. Youtube could just refuse to serve his videos because they decide they don't want to

They have more lawyers than God, I can't help but think the contract they all have with Google favors Google to the extreme.

It'd be dangerous to his revenue stream.

If he reduces views on YT, the algo will recommend him less. His internal sponsors won't pay more for the non YT content so he'll just be gutting his own traffic if it takes off. Assuming he has disks around with all his finished content on it, he could stand it up later if he wanted, but it's not like Peertube can host an unlimited amount of video for free. Someone is paying for those disks and for the transfer of those bits.

Ideally, he'd stand up his own PT and we'd share in watching his stuff and reduce costs Peer style. But he's still going to be out a serious payment stream and the PT network can't just perpetually bare the cost of his storage.

It's like if LMG wanted to host their back catalog, we'd need peer tube hosts with a PB of storage sitting around ready to take his catalog.

LOL, the world may never know.

I'm still not sure which side of that whole thing i'm on. I know he's less annoying than Linus. But even Billit labs seems to have less hate for LMG than he does

That is true, but yes Gamers Nexus is (relatively) small, and a million dollars can be gone in no time, if a multi billion dollar company decides you need to be gone.
1 million dollars is far from enough to run just a single somewhat high profile copyright lawsuit.

This case is simple, so they will probably manage that pretty easily, there is basically no way Bloomberg can win. It's just a typical harassment tactic that will work against by far the most smaller outlets. But Steve is smart, he knows bullshit when he sees it, and he is not easily scared.

But if Bloomberg gets pissed enough, Gamers Nexus could soon be toast. Just like Gamers Nexus has friends more powerful than themselves, so does Bloomberg.

And 3 frivolous take down notices can appear from various sources in no time. And to YouTube Gamers Nexus is definitely small fry.

"We're going to collect as much data about you as we can to sell to advertisers"

That's a rather pessimistic interpretation of a privacy policy that starts with this:

The spirit of the policy remains the same: we aren’t here to exploit you or your info. We just want to bring you great new videos and creators to enjoy, and the systems we build to do that will sometimes require stuff like cookies.

and which in section 10 (Notice for Nevada Residents) says:

We do not "sell" personal information to third parties for monetary consideration [as defined in Nevada law] [...] Nevada law defines "sale" to mean the exchange of certain types of personal information for monetary consideration to another person. We do not currently sell personal information as defined in the Nevada law.

So yes, I suppose they may be selling personal information by some other definition (I don't know the Nevada law in question). But it feels extremely aggressive to label it a "shithole" that "collect[s] as much data about you as we can to sell to advertisers" based on the text of the privacy policy as provided.

If those other sources make more money and get more viewers, why did it start on YouTube?

Oh please get over yourself, you silly self righteous fan boy. Don't act as if your beloved "Tech Jesus" is above tactics like click baiting to get clicks and views. Almost every single one of his videos has a click bait or otherwise "algorithm optimized" title and thumbnail.

And I get it, it's their livelihood, they rely on getting views, but that doesn't make it not click bait and this one in particular is a gross exageration: they got a single bogus copyright strike and it was reverted. The channel was never going to be deleted.

Hey and it worked too, because I got it in my youtube feed, clicked on it and watched the video, and I probably wouldn't have if I had known it was such a nothing burger.

One strike is nothing.

Where did I claim Gamers Nexus is above using click bait!
But very clearly it isn't here, and the amount of downvotes you received for claiming it, hints that most don't agree with you.
So maybe it's not so much me, as it is you making an unreasonable and unfounded claim.

And no the take down is not reverted, it is in a process where it MAY be reverted.

Also I don't see you provide a single valid argument for your statement, while I actually explain how it is not click bait, because the threat is real.

All YouTube will be is just AI “creator” slop soon. People should be ditching that shit post-haste.

That is where the majority of the audience is.

Aw, don't you love searching for an update on something just for the algorithm to show you a low view count video that's a mediocre computer voice talking over a barely related slideshow?

Oh absolutely. And it’s one of the same 3 or 4 voices in every video. And not only that, but a lot of the videos themselves are AI. Check the comments… yeah. No one notices or even cares.

It’s a foregone conclusion at this point. AI going to absolutely wreck the creativity of mankind. Art will be viewed in history books, and it’s fucking sad.

But very clearly it isn’t here

How the hell isn't it?

Title: "Our Channel Could Be Deleted" <insert dramatic thumbnail featuring the word "SILENCED" in big capital letters>

Yet even in the video itself they explain that :

1. Youtube sided with them, the copyright strike got reverted and the video restored. The only recourse Bloomberg has is to press actual charges in a court of law.
2. It takes three copyright strikes to delete a channel, not one.

And I will add my own 3: YouTube will never just outright delete a cashcow channel like GamersNexus.

I get that they're pissed because the claim was bogus and it cost them good ad revenue on that video, and they will probably not recoup the cost of making it, but the channel is not and never was in danger of being deleted. So the title is clickbait intended to generate outrage for some, let's be honest, rather mid content.

the amount of downvotes

LOL "I'm right because I got more upvotes".

How the hell isn’t it?

Because it is true, the channel could be deleted, and it was an obvious attempt by Bloomberg to silence him, which he shows many reason for why they may want to do in the video.

When it is true it is not clickbait.

Youtube sided with them, the copyright strike got reverted and the video restored.

For the fourth time, it is NOT reverted, and the video is NOT restored.

It takes three copyright strikes to delete a channel.

Maybe it is the third? You don't know, at least you haven't shown anything to indicate that you do.

And I will add my own 3: YouTube will never just outright delete a cashcow channel like GamersNexus.

Again Gamers Nexus is small fry for YouTube.

LOL “I’m right because I got more upvotes”.

No you make false claims, and was downvoted for it. Usually click bait is an easily accepted answer, but here it was not because you are wrong.

How the fuck are you so dense?

Read my whole comment. It is demonstrably NOT true.

Surely torrent distributed video can still have sponsorships in it, stick it up as a video on your own website is an option too. Could even go for low res video on website (cheap to host) along with an option of HD torrent.

I did and edited my comment, adding more false claims doesn't make you right.
Also it's rich calling me dense, when you repeatedly make the same false claim that the take down is reverted when it is not. It's explained very clearly in the video, that it takes 10 days from filing the complaint, and if Bloomberg persist on the issue, the take down stands.

You are very dense to not accept that when it's explained to you at least three times!!!