this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2026
835 points (97.7% liked)
Technology
87529 readers
3165 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It wouldn't be worth it anyway. Assuming we're trying to compete with YouTube you'd want fairly long fairly high quality videos, 25 minute video at 4k (reasonable length and resolution for 2026) would take between 12 and 13 gigabytes of storage, assuming some videos are slightly shorter or slightly low quality maybe 1080p you could personally contribute about four to five videos on your storage plan. At which point you wonder whether or not it's even worth the effort.
Even one terabyte storage drive wouldn't store enough videos to really make a competitive product.
The only reason that YouTube can make it work is because they get their storage in bulk and therefore get massive discounts.
This means that even if Google was broken up I can't see YouTube being a viable standalone product.