Thread 105563989

Youtube is an illusion. It's an instantaneous ocean of content. They say they have billions of videos, so how they keep of all of them an stream them to so many people?

What happens is that they did several tricks to minimize the number of videos.
For example:

1) your search sucks, gives you 3 videos of which 1 is not even related
2) they push the same suggested videos to millions of people

then how come my videos from 2007 are still there

oh sweet a schizo thread

>>105564071
but on the other hand, how come everybody mentions the exact same 50 videos from 2007?

i often go to a webpage with many linked videos, most of them are gone, account suspended and so on

>>105564071
They are buried in any search results page, though, if they appear at all, aren't they?

>>105563989 (OP)
what are you going to do about it?

>>105566084
I will expose you, Susan.

>>105564104
>but on the other hand, how come everybody mentions the exact same 50 videos from 2007?

newer videos are prioritized by the algorithm both because they might be more relevant but also because efficient storage (most videos are barely ever watched especially old ones and they can be put on slower drives),

did you forget to take your meds again?

>>105563989 (OP)
based thread, more interesting than the others right now at least

>>105566352
Susan's been dead for a while bro, a jeet is in charge now.

>>105563989 (OP)
You can watch truly random youtube videos by generating a partial ID then abusing some APIs to complete it. There's not much point to it though because 99.9% of what you'll get is Indians doing what I assume are local meme dances.

This makes a lot of sense. Ask any random people, on the internet or wherever, which youtubers they know. Most of them will know the same ones as you. Imagine what a coincidence, there are 100 million of them, yet everybody in the world knows the same 100 of them.

>>105563989 (OP)
I can hear how stupid you are over the internet.

>>105570225
>generating a partial ID then abusing some APIs to complete it

anyone document how?

>>105569804
just started applying filters. These work good

/iphone|window|apple|glass|liquid|america|deep|seek|\bfuck| buy |gpt|openai|altman|^.{0,25}$|saar|indian|pajeet|\bai\b|china\b|chinese|cuck|nigg|\?$/i

>>105563989 (OP)
I swear there was numerous sites that retrieved random videos but they are all down now. Maybe OP isnt as schizo as we all think

>>105563989 (OP)
>They say they have billions of videos, so how they keep of all of them an stream them to so many people?
its not as hard as it sounds.
you just dont distribute all the videos to every single cache around the planet like you would with every new mr beast video as it comes out.
for the videos that never get accessed, they can generally stay in one spot, never accessed, modified - stored cheaply.
now when someone does want to access it, it takes awhile to process it and serve it. you should notice this when you want to watch a really old video that no one has probably loaded in 10 years, there is a noticeable delay in serving it.
if it continues to get viewed (say, a 10 year old video suddenly goes viral) then it gets distributed around to the global caches, and it becomes much more accessible (and costly)

>>105563989 (OP)
It's compressed and re-rendered, I imagine.
Yes, it's an extreme amount of data even with all the tricks they use and continue to develop, but not when you have a 30 billion dollar yearly revenue.

>>105572773
>>105572788
If it were no big deal, they wouldn't limit your search to 3 videos and recommend everybody the same ones.

>>105572878
>they wouldn't limit your search to 3 videos
???
what are you on about

>>105572878
its just their preference for shoving new slop infront of you because thats easier to monetize.
i wouldnt even personally care if they had a rule "we will delete every video after 5 years of not recieving a view", they just don't need to do it. you misunderstand the scale of their operations. hoarding data is their literal one job.

>>105572910
Hoarding data is very different than streaming any video, at any moment to anybody in the world. You will do everything to limit the number of videos you make available by any means necessary.

>>105572929
i already explained to you why thats not a big deal. because every old video is just kept in a "hoarding" state until its not.

>>105564071
Haven't they started deleting old vids or old accounts? Some of the best stuff is from early youtube so that'd suck

>>105563989 (OP)
They could just charge a small amount of money for every upload. Would reduce qualuty content by 1% and garbage uploads by 95%. But they'd rather pull corporate tricks, delete good but seldonly watched stuff, etc.

>>105573166
kek people should be getting paid to upload to them. since all these videos are training speech, language, conversational tone, as these change through the years, patterns, and the video data itself. the transcript. and all the peoples comments spurred on by YOUR creation.
you know why theyre the current top leader in ai video generation right now?

>>105573166
They already delete a lot of stuff. Well, not delete, just remove from public access. Hide it from you.

Keeping 1 copy of 20 billion videos is not a big deal for them.
But the result is the same, they are gone.