News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Magazine publishers with video ambitions see YouTube as s... by mistermann on Saturday May 19, 2018 @01:08AM (#17106743)
> The focus of Youtube is video whereas video is just another feature of FB.

Today yes, but with FB's technical capabilities, I can't see why they couldn't knock off a respectable (if not superior in most respects, considering Google's apparent complete lack of skills or motivation in UI usability, and discoverability/search of all things) clone of YouTube in way under a year. And, they have a massive engaged social network to go with it, something Google can't bring to the table (they tried and failed). It could take them a long time to assemble critical mass of videos, but unless YouTube forbid it in their TOS (which I doubt, considering many people are openly advertising their steemit channels) most producers would clone their content to FB very quickly, especially smaller ones who are pissed off at demonetization.

FB's weak links in my estimation are the stubborn insistence to have everything under Facebook.com (rather than a sibling site), and the trust they've lost in the last year.

Re:Magazine publishers with video ambitions see YouTube as s... by ambicapter on Saturday May 19, 2018 @01:32AM (#17106792)
> clone of YouTube in way under a year.

Probably because some aspects of computer science/website engineering are not entirely nailed down and years of experience still count for something.

Re:Magazine publishers with video ambitions see YouTube as s... by mistermann on Sunday May 20, 2018 @02:01AM (#17111453)
Do you think I'm overestimating or underestimating?
Re:Magazine publishers with video ambitions see YouTube as s... by amelius on Saturday May 19, 2018 @06:03AM (#17107264)
> FB's weak links in my estimation are the stubborn insistence to have everything under Facebook.com (rather than a sibling site), and the trust they've lost in the last year.

They have WhatsApp and Instagram under different names.

Re:Magazine publishers with video ambitions see YouTube as s... by eco on Saturday May 19, 2018 @12:56PM (#17108658)
A few days ago I told my wife that Instagram was owned by Facebook and she was shocked. She had no idea. There are clues scattered around, mostly related to trying to get you to add your Facebook friends on Instagram or trying to get you to use Instagram more but not much else. I couldn't even find the word Facebook on Instagram's site just now (not even on their About Us page). It's probably on there somewhere but it seems to be pretty deliberately disassociated with Facebook.

I wonder if Facebook is treating Instagram like a second earth. If they ruin the first they still have a backup.

Re:Magazine publishers with video ambitions see YouTube as s... by dannyw on Saturday May 19, 2018 @07:50AM (#17107483)
Both are acquisitions.
Re:Magazine publishers with video ambitions see YouTube as s... by wyclif on Saturday May 19, 2018 @09:13AM (#17107759)
Not only are both acquisitions, but Facebook's strategy there might also involve diversification and disassociation with the parent brand. In other words, they foresaw they'd take a hit in user trust and even popularity so they're OK with spinning off new features as a completely different brand. The negative perceptions Facebook is currently dealing with don't really bleed into (at least in the minds of users) WhatsApp and Instagram, even though they now are part of the same engineering culture.
Re:Magazine publishers with video ambitions see YouTube as s... by Lionsion on Saturday May 19, 2018 @11:01AM (#17108135)
> Today yes, but with FB's technical capabilities, I can't see why they couldn't knock off a respectable (if not superior in most respects ... clone of YouTube in way under a year.

Facebook's challenge, IMHO, isn't technical, it's cultural. Namely: it's transparently selfish and seems to mostly act for it's short term advantage. It doesn't know how to share a pie. It doesn't seem to have a consistent strategy for people to build around.

> most producers would clone their content to FB very quickly, especially smaller ones who are pissed off at demonetization.

> and the trust they've lost in the last year.

Facebook let social games get out of hand, then it kneecapped all the social game makers.

Facebook kneecapped people who learned to depend on FB Pages to reach their audiences, to force them to buy ads.

Facebook just kneecapped video producers, probably worse than Youtube did. They kneecapped the news media as well.

If I was a video content producer, I wouldn't use a Facebook Youtube clone, even if it seemed better. I'd expect to get kneecapped, probably in the 2-3 year timeframe.

Re:Magazine publishers with video ambitions see YouTube as s... by mistermann on Saturday May 19, 2018 @12:01PM (#17108415)
Totally agree.

> If I was a video content producer, I wouldn't use a Facebook Youtube clone, even if it seemed better. I'd expect to get kneecapped, probably in the 2-3 year timeframe.

But unless any platform has an exclusivity clause, it's pretty risk free and largely effort free (a multi-platform deployment tool will emerge I'd think) for producers to publish to all platforms. Actually, if(!) platforms would cooperate, this would be nice because they could then differentiate on features.