I think you’re proving the monopoly argument yourself: if they only way to compete with Google is an innovation that generations of scientists have been working towards, it does paint a grim picture of competition in this space. Besides, are we ignoring Gemini?
Seems like an open question as to whether that violates any laws.
Another way to look at it is that if you publish a service on the web, you have limited rights to restrict what people do with it.
Isn't that the logic Google search relies on in the first place? I didn't give permission for Google to crawl and index and deep link to my site (let alone summarize and train LLMs on it). They just did it anyway, because it's on a public website.
What's the alternative? Building a competing search index as a relative nobody on the web is very difficult, from the outset, and is made more difficult from sites taking extra measures to stop bots in general now.
Google's crawler is given special privileges in this right and can bypass basically all bot checks. Anyone else has to just wade through the mud and accept they can't index much of the web.
But in this current climate, they can admit it and then dare Google to tell them to stop... After Google has just had an antitrust ruling against it for dominating the search market.
Google doesn't really have a leg to stand on and they know it.
Our business uses Vimeo because we get a discounted rate on acami CDN via their bulk purchasing power. YouTube is free but that comes with a lot of headaches. For example not being able to hide the recommended videos at the end of a video, which annoyed our clients in the past when we did use YouTube. YouTube also needs to be public to be embeddable, which also created issues for us.
However this announcement has me terrified and literally scrambling for a backup plan.
Youtube also doesn't let you replace an already-uploaded video while maintaining the URL, which is incredibly painful if you need to edit a posted video for whatever reason.
If it's a small number of videos, specifically ones that are unlikely to go viral, then a self-hosted or externally paid hosted peertube site might be a good option.
Vimeo you manage your brand and presentation. YouTube you have little control over where or how your video is presented.
Vimeo also provides VOD for some large brands and media companies.
Yeah, it's this. It's a hosting platform, not a social media platform. You see a ton of people who have short films, art projects, commercial portfolios and stuff like that hosted at Vimeo. They don't need/want comments, discoverability, or to deal with things like automated DRM takedowns. Clean, simple, video hosting.
Sounds like it is not maintaining 60 fps. Higher display refresh rate wouldn't fix that.
reply