Most of this comment was my own speculation based on the details they’ve shared publicly. The details I know of publicly are:

• The seem to be profitable. Or at least in a relatively sustainable place; they talk about profit a lot, but usually in terms of how the “profit” is split between creators. I forget, maybe the Wendover “history of Nebula” video from a while back talked more specifically about profitability?
• They’re choosing not to take outside investment. This is something the CEO, Dave Wiskus, talked about particularly with respect to the Lifetime subscriptions, describing those as their option for building up the sort of large amounts of cash that they might otherwise have gone to outside investment for, in order to fund bigger projects
• The fact that they are, quite visibly, expanding their range of content

The rest was me speculating about how the business model would seem to work based on those factors plus my limited, layperson’s, understanding of their industry.

I will check these out

FWIW the specific channels I recommended were mostly based on stalking your user profile and grabbing a couple I thought might interest you based on that. But I didn’t have much to go on from your Lemmy history specifically. They weren’t necessarily the first ones I’d recommend to someone in the general public, or to someone whose interests I knew better.

if only I could figure out how to use peertube

From my experience trying Peertube, its biggest problem for now is just…the server infrastructure of existing instances isn’t very good. I got really bad buffering. Maybe better server-side encoding could have helped with that. Maybe they need stronger server hardware with better outbound network connections. Maybe I just need to find a more locally-hosted instance to me. Maybe it’s something else. But the user experience was really not good. Which is a shame. As nice as Nebula’s sort of worker-owned co-op model is, true federated video would be really nice for those of us not privileged enough to become a member of the exclusive club. YouTube being basically the only real option really sucks, and I’m sick of alternative options like Gfycat dying off and losing all their content.

From everything I’ve heard, they’re already profitable, and are explicitly choosing only to grow in a sustainable way, without taking on outside investment which could force them into enshittifying down the line. With a relative lack of need to show extreme growth, and a lack of reliance on outside factors like advertising (being subscription-based), the only major risk that I can see for them long-term is user churn. Which is definitely a risk, but with the ever-creeping growth of the range of content they have and (at least for now) an attitude of being customer-friendly, churn seems a relatively low risk.

As far as I can see, at worst, the platform dies if the YouTube channels of the people on the platform die because of the YouTube algorithm, and they get bad churn (with fewer new subscribers because of the aforementioned dead YouTube channels at the top of the funnel), and they don’t get new more successful channels on before that happens. A scenario that’s far from unlikely, but which I would describe as “catastrophic, whether or not Nebula exists today”, so its existence for now as a hedge against more likely bad scenarios is still worthwhile.

I’ve never heard of dropout or nebula. At all

I must admit, I find that astonishing. Not that the average person on the street wouldn’t have heard of them, but that someone online enough to be having these sorts of conversations wouldn’t have.

Are you familiar with CollegeHumor, perhaps? After their corporate owners got screwed around by Facebook’s pivot to video (and the fraudulent data involved), they were going to shut down CH entirely until the head of the creative group reached an agreement to buy it out, and under his ownership he created the private streaming service Dropout. Today it’s mostly entirely private, with promotional content like the occasional episode or clips uploaded as Shorts put onto YouTube.

Nebula got its start as a sort of multi-channel network owned by and for YouTube creators, to avoid many of the big pitfalls that MCNs became known for. Its earliest more well-known members are Sam from Wendover/Half As Interesting, Brian from Real Engineering, Colin from CGP Grey, and Philip from Kursgesagt. The latter two later left over “creative differences” (leaks have seemed to imply, basically, that they wanted to keep it a small elite group at the core which could profit from increased growth while adding more creators, while the rest of the people then involved wanted a more equitable arrangement). It’s since grown to way too many channels to name, but if you’re interested you can see the full list here. A few choice selections might include tech reporter TechAltar (whose recent “1 month without US tech giants” and the Nebula Plus follow-up “Which alternatives am I sticking with?” video are reminiscent of the one this thread is about), astrophysicist Angela Collier, Canadian cultural commentator J.J. McCullough, history & video game design analysis channels Extra History & Extra Credits, TLDR News, human geography (with a focus on conflicts) from RealLifeLore. Linus from LTT has talked about Nebula once or twice, though his commentary on it gets wildly wrong, claiming it was a sort of pump & dump scheme where the main goal was to sell to private equity or something, seemingly because he’s projecting his own techbro capitalist attitude onto them. As I sort of mentioned above, Nebula basically serves as an uber-patreon. You pay a single subscription fee (when I signed up it was $30 per year, but it may have changed) to get mostly content that could be gotten for free (but with ads) on YouTube, plus some bonus content, some stuff a bit earlier, and a few Nebula Originals. Lindsay Ellis might be the most notable one there. Since getting harassed off the Internet by Twitter, all her videos have been Nebula Originals apart from 2 promoting her new book.

Neither of these are really meant to be a complete YouTube replacement, but rather a way for them to create more control over their stuff and get the stability of knowing they aren’t relying on the fickle YouTube algorithm (and the whims of YouTube censorship).

Why is the open source Chromium ranked worse than Google Chrome?

It’s not easy, but you’re not guaranteed to end up

either lose your shirt, sell your business, or become entrenched in a position whose inertia is difficult to break

It depends on the personalities involved and the business model they go with.

Nebula has done really well with consistent growth as a premium offering where people pay one subscription fee to get ad-free videos from exclusively high-quality creators across a quote broad range of niches, in addition to bonus extras and Nebula Originals.

Dropout seems to have a lot of success with a range of mostly unscripted comedy, centred around a core cast of trusted comedic actors with a larger range of guests.

Floatplane, on the other hand, seems much less successful, probably owing to its business model being basically Patreon’s, but only for video. Instead of the wide range of content you get for surprisingly reasonable amounts of Nebula and Dropout, Floatplane ends up looking very expensive if you want to support more than one or two creators. Plus the creators on it haven’t got the same degree of trust; it ends up reeking of the sort of techbro vibes that people are explicitly trying to get away from.

Well, there is Nebula, which is kinda like that. But most of them also put their videos on YouTube, using Nebula as the premium ad-free option with a little bonus content.

the official app tries to not be killed by Android woth the usual tricks (permanent notification, disabling battery optimisation)

…

You can (theoretically) control how often locations are tracked and sent but for me was using the location service constantly and draining battery quite a bit.

Ah. Those are exactly what I was worried about. It’s not able to just happen entirely in the background the same way Google’s feature does, then? Kind of automagically?

But not exactly how the app works. If it’s a Strava-like app you have to remember to run in the foreground, the value is a lot lower to me than something that either uses or replicates GPS’ automatic background behaviour.

How exactly does it work from your phone’s perspective? Does it hook into Google Play Services location data? Do you need to install a different low-level application that replicates that functionality? (If so, what’s the battery life impact like?) Does it need a foregrounded app?

I’m really interested in this, because like the author I’m really upset at Google killing yet another incredibly useful feature. But the article is a little light on details.

I actually really like the black black. And they didn’t use red red (assuming that term is supposed to mean FF0000); it’s quite a dull red, which I find works quite well. I prefer the high contrast mode though, with white white on black black, rather than slightly lower-contrast light grey text. I’m told it’s apparently evidence-based to use the lower-contrast version, but it doesn’t appeal to me.

Though I will say I intensely dislike the use of underline styling on “WRONG”. Underline, on the web, has universally come to be a signal of a hyperlink, and should almost never be used otherwise. It also uses some much nicer colours for both unclicked and visited hyperlinks.

The most important difference between 1 and 2 is, IMO, the width limiter. You can actually read the source yourself, it’s extremely simple hand-written HTML & (inline) CSS. max-width:650px; stops you needing to crane your head. It also has slightly lower contrast, which I’m told is supposedly better for the eyes according to some studies, but personally I don’t really like as much, which is why “Best” is my favourite, since it has a little button to toggle between light mode and dark mode, or between lower and maximum contrast.

The original is terrible. It works ok on a phone, but on a wide computer screen it takes up the full width, which is terrible for readability.

If you don’t like the colours, the “Best” lets you toggle between light mode and dark mode, and toggle between lower and higher contrast. (i.e., between black on white, dark grey on light grey, light grey on dark grey, or white on black)

See also: https://motherfuckingwebsite.com/

See also: http://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com/

And: https://thebestmotherfucking.website/

Both of which are vastly better.

Yeah I think this one became particularly tricky and wormed its way into a lot of people’s minds even who would otherwise be wary of it, because even Labor and the Greens stood in favour of it (with some minor tweaks), due to poor tech literacy.

Happy cake day!

I’d be happy for the Australian government to take them to task over this one. But I’m afraid you’ve fallen for Murdoch propaganda with the journalism thing.

They weren’t “using our journalism”. They provide a direct benefit to the news organisations. It’s a mostly symbiotic relationship, with people going to Google and Facebook because it’s a good way to find news that interests them, and news organisations being funnelled traffic directly to them for free. But honestly, if money should be flowing in any direction, it’s to Google and Meta. The financial benefit for news organisations of the existing relationship is far greater for news organisations than it is for Google and Meta. People would still be Googling things and sharing on Facebook even if news didn’t make up part of that.

Jeff Jarvis is a great thinker and communicator in this space, and he moderates a great discussion on the topic here. About 34 minutes into the video they hear from a QUT professor who is pretty scathing towards the NMBC.

I remember spending hours tinkering with Linux in my bedroom as a kid

I feel like the environment of subject-specific forums and IRC chat that Millennial geeks grew up with is very different from the centralised, generic, algorithm-driven social media that Gen Z grew up with, and non-geeky Millennials, Gen X, and Boomers adopted in the late aughts & '10s. That was really the best of what social media could do, with far fewer of the unhealthy downsides.

Late last year Australia passed a ban for the use of social media of under-16s. In principle I think this is a really good idea.

Unfortunately they rushed it through without any thought as to how it would actually work in terms of age verification. It’s now been 6 months, which means we’re 6 months away from when it’s supposed to come into effect, and we still don’t have any idea how it’s actually supposed to work. But the principle behind it: the idea that social media is actually really not healthy for our brains, especially at a young and vulnerable age, is a sound one. And there’s only more and more research coming out to support that.

Omg thanks for linking that thread. The amount of removed and deleted content on Lemmy is so frustrating. I hate the fact that removed or deleted posts also completely nuke all the comments on it.

Reddit’s approach is so much better in this respect. A removed post removed the OP’s text, but if it’s a link post the link remains, and all the comments remain.

Yeah tbh the Mastodon formatting was annoying me too. I was surprised at how short each of them were; I thought Mastodon supported much longer posts than Twitter, but these seem basically the same?