I've participated in like half a dozen topics on this forum where the "advice" given for GOG to compete with Steam is to make their own proprietary client mandatory. It seems clear that any new or small or upstart video platform just has to make a proprietary client and then the masses will come pouring in...but only if it is required! You're welcome, vimeo, et al.

Depends. After all, people are willing to give up their internet bandwidth also on bittorrent, emule etc. so that others may download stuff. Even my mobile phone's car navigation software has the option to use peer-to-peer technology to download navigation maps to the device, ie. as you are downloading them from other users, you are also uploading them to others.

It doesn't necessarily mean that thousands of people need to be specifically sharing some video day in day out, but e.g. it already helps a lot if people, who are watching some streamed video, are at the same time streaming it to others. The more there are watchers for some video, the more there are also people sharing it.

Anyway I don't know if that is what LBRY is about, but I feel it would be the only way it could compete with Youtube, by not being a youtube clone but a decentralized video streaming protocol. The failed Vimeos and whatevers are an example of losing the battle if you try to be just like Youtube.

Decentralized also seems to be the way to go to prvent censorship by other companies/people, as it's harder to purge content and creators....just my two cents.

As i understand most of the similar video platforms were equally used, until youtube offered to pay creators a better deal, which then they became a monopoly...

And they act like a monopoly. Go on major losses til your competitors are gone, then jack up the price or do XYZ.

I'm watching videos from Bitchute honestly, not as my primary but for things Youtube has gone anal over with banning people over non-TOS-breaking and non-illegal-content.

I welcome more competition. I also hope to see Google broken up.

It's not just lazy, it's the sheer volume of the site. There's something for pretty much everybody in one place.

The only thing that's likely to kill YT is if they chase off enough of the content providers with their ad changes.

Yeah I thought about that too, then there wouldn't be one (oversensitive) company anymore who decides to drop some video.

Of course if there is some central hub at lbry.com or whatever, the admins might drop some link to a video from there... but I presume others could still put the same link to some other site, if they wish. IF it is peer-to-peer technology.

From what I can tell, this is peer to peer technology. They do have a couple servers, but they do stream off your personal computer for much of it.

Yup

>no streaming via browser available, require application (as far as I've understood)
not a competitor already. Nobody will install some app on pc in order to watch vids

Im using invidious to watch youtube without overheating my laptop by overbloated interface and thousand of telemetry/ads-related scripts (basically its opensource proxy with simple UI. Which parse youtube itself instead of using its api, so its impossible for google to ban it). And I also enjoy (but there are almost no content creators right now - just reposts of youtube vids, mostly) the idea of peertube - its decentralized video hosting, built around webtorrent and activitypub (thus everybody can run their own node, yet each node will stay connected to others). If nothing else, it has largest chance of becoming new youtube for geeks (but not for 95% of people - similarly to how all these riot, tox and other rings didnt become the new whatsup)

To me the only real competitor for Youtube so far has been D.Tube but it seems like you need a decent internet to watch videos on this website.

You're missing the point, YouTube has been abusing it's ability to screw with the content creator's advertising revenue for a while now and randomly trying to chase some creators off. Meanwhile, PewdiePie can do more or less whatever he likes without any real consequences.

Any competitor to YouTube is going to have to be decentralized, just because building the infrastructure necessary to compete would cost hundreds of millions of dollars and until there's a substantial amount of content there, nobody is going to visit.