Yeah right. The competition is doing so well. Try running a video hosting service within the frameworks of the law. It's still the most popular service by a longshot. Classic HN being delusional again.
Do people go to Facebook directly to just watch video from their non-friends? Is it even possible? Genuinely asking, I haven’t used FB for quite some time.
However, I think it's too restrictive to only consider platforms to be competitors of Youtube only when the use case is analogous, and it's incorrect to imply that Facebook can only be competing with Youtube if their users exclusively use it to watch videos.
Any platform that supports video streaming is potentially competing against Youtube. The specific use case of the platform is irrelevant, only scale and mindshare matter - the degree to which people spend time there rather than on Youtube.
We're talking about monetised, profitable, video content aimed at children.
These other companies can manage it.
YouTube can't, but importantly YouTube wants it both ways - they want to include content that targets children without providing any of the protection that parents expect.
And that expectation isn't unreasonable. We don't want parents who helicopter every waking hour of their children's lives, we want to give parents some freedoms to allow their children to explore and grow.
Posturing above the rest of the community isn't helpful either. If you're posting here, you're as much "HN" as anyone.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html