As someone who values privacy and personal data, I always try to use services and solutions that protect my privacy. I say ’try’ because there are many things that you can’t simply abandon. Things that only serve personal use, such as Notes, Tasks, Calendar and Email, can be switched to self-hosted. But you can’t do that with YouTube or Spotify. This is because these platforms require a large user base to operate. PeerTube could technically replace YouTube, but it lacks content, a user network and established habits. Habits can’t be changed overnight.

In light of this, an alternative approach is to use proxy applications to bridge the gap between users and the original platform. NewPipe and FreeTube are examples of proxy applications for YouTube, and there are also alternative clients for Reddit and X. These applications offer a more privacy-respecting experience while still leveraging content from the major platforms. However, they remain completely dependent on the original platform. If YouTube changes its API, NewPipe, FreeTube and Invidious — YouTube’s client server — will have to change too. Entire instances worldwide will cease functioning. Developers will rush to fix the code. And the cycle repeats. I used to wonder if they ever got tired. Did it ever feel pointless? Was it worth enduring endless code fixes in the name of privacy? But perhaps, for them, that question didn’t matter. They knew it was an unequal battle. They knew they were completely passive. Whenever the big platform wanted to change, they had to follow. And they still did. They plunged into the fight knowing they would lose for the ideal of a freer online space where users have control over their own data. So I no longer see this as pointless. I respect them.

Where does the problem lie?

The alternatives are good. The problem lies in the data. YouTube has billions of hours of video content. Spotify has tens of millions of songs and playlists, as well as recommendation algorithms. Users can’t manually transfer that amount of data to another platform simply because there are no tools, protocols or permissions in place. Even if a superior technical solution were available, the average user — those who don’t care about privacy — wouldn’t leave YouTube because they don’t see enough benefit to justify the trade-off. Those who do care are caught between idealism and reality: they know they shouldn’t use YouTube, but they can’t help themselves.

I used to think the solution was a common standard. Europe achieved this with DAV to unify cloud storage, and more recently pressured messaging platforms to interact with each other under the Digital Markets Act. An open protocol for video and music would solve the dependency problem fundamentally. However, I see this as a very distant prospect. Although ActivityPub and Fediverse exist and PeerTube uses them, PeerTube failed because they couldn’t solve the problem of content and user networks. Technical standards cannot create content. An open protocol is useless if no one publishes content to it.

So, we are still dependent. And we will remain dependent for a very long time.