<div class="text-justify">

There is some big news out of Twitch recently, but there doesn't seem to be much talk around it. 

As of today, 720p is the highest resolution Twitch is going to be streaming into South Korea. They are doing this because content providers now have to pay a delivery fee to push content through Korean ISPs. And, since this is going to affect all streaming services, while Twitch are the first to react by automatically throttling quality into the country, it is likely that YouTube and Netflix are going to follow suit. 

>No big deal?

![image.png](https://files.peakd.com/file/peakd-hive/tarazkp/23uFVzc9kbpE3tKzSWxrjK3G6LGbZZAtUsq9RJUqMjQ2ExT5Cjrgavcqpc4UezYMJQFX5.png)

Well, I think that this is going to become more common in the future, where bandwidth is going to be paid for increasingly by the service providers, but it will take some time. This is similar to paying for free content from news services in some way, but no one is talking about paying content creators that aren't monetized already, for their contributions - except on Hive. 

But, there are other factors to consider here also, as while 720p isn't absolutely terrible for streaming Twitch gaming content, it *is terrible* for content coming from Netflix and the like. People over the last years have gone out of their way to buy Ultra high-definition screens and now if the other services follow suit, they will be useless. Most likely, what they will do is up the price *even more* for HD streaming quality and make the consumer pay - something that Twitch can't do, because *the consumer doesn't pay for access to the platform.

>But, what if they did?

Twitch currently has a lot of monetized content creators, especially around gaming, but they are paid through "direct" contributions to the performers. However, even that has been jigged, with many of those earning over 100K a year who were enjoying a 70/30 split, now getting it [reduced to a 50/50 split.](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/21/technology/twitch-reduce-payments-streamers.html) Is it greedy on Amazon's part? Yes - but since it is their platform, it is their rules, right? After all, the *direct payment* is through the platform and Amazon holds the keys to the paycheck. 

P2P streaming is likely the future of this cost, where the bandwidth load can be shared across privately paid for bandwidth, but the technology currently doesn't offer the same experience as it does when centralized. But, the more content creators are punished for being successful, the more attractive the decentralized models become.

Up until now, it has been more about being demonetized and banned due to moralistic judgements on content, but now the content creators are essentially having to pay for using the service through a 50% tax, but they don't have any control over the service at all, no ownership. Next year, it might be 75% and they will be told, *be glad you are getting anything at all.* 

>If you don't like it, leave.

But don't expect to take anything with you - *you own nothing.*

The future of user-sourced content has to be decentralized, because the centralized outfits rely on ad revenue alone in order to generate value. This is unsustainable for user-derived content, because it is always going to drive content direction, meaning that say or do the wrong thing and get demonetized because it is bad for business, even if the viewing audience wants to see it. 

These massive platforms that cater for large amounts of people have it good in terms of what they can offer advertisers, but it is a double edged sword, because they will continually need to satisfy the whims and fancies of them. But, the large number of people viewing are only there because of the wide assortment of content available, cut the selection enough and people will drift to other services, where they can get what they want.

>See what happens?

At some point, content starts to get pushed to multiple platforms that cater for narrow niches, distributing the viewing audience more widely and making them harder to target through advertising. But, this also means that those streamers and content creators are not able to garner as large support, so if they are relying on advertising revenue to pay the bills, they might struggle. 

All of this is raising more questions as to the value streams of the internet, which many still regard as "free" but the reality is, it has never been more expensive to use than it is today - at least since it went out to the general public. We pay for absolutely every part of it, whether directly or indirectly and the idea of "free content" is an illusion, because it comes saddled with advertising that obviously is earning something, meaning it is attracting expenditure. 

It is even getting to the point that paid streaming services are starting to resemble *free-to-air* television, with scheduled time release of content and advertising models being introduced.

>It is *programming.*

And, because *we have been programmed* to buy gadgets that run high-resolution, they know that people will eventually be willing to pay even more for the higher quality of image, even if there is a lower quality of service.

This isn't about bandwidth and delivery service fees, it is a battle in the war between centralization and decentralization, where the monopolistic actions of corporation and government are vying for power over the control of us, the consumer. The more the battle rages, the more average people will *opt-out* of centralized services and eventually, even governance models and start to look for alternatives. 

>The alternatives exist, we are on one now. 

In time, crypto-powered, decentralized, community owned and operated investment vehicles that connect content creator to consumer directly, will be the norm. But, until then, there is going to be a lot of complication and battles waged in the power grab. 

To win, we don't have to fight, we just have to change where we consume and spend our ~~money~~ crypto. 

Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]


</div>

Posted Using [LeoFinance <sup>Beta</sup>](https://leofinance.io/@tarazkp/low-resolution-high-centralization)