[I LOVE BITCHUTE! Make no mistake. I'm not knocking them. But I am just speaking directly, technically. I found on wikipedia that someone had studied Bitchute closely in 2019 and they say that peer-to-peer technology is NOT driving Bitchute. This has been my own conclusion by watching it. Perhaps the peer-to-peer thing is still far too dodgy and not ready yet. And I do hope that we get more peer-to-peer. Alex Linder and I have discussed this. It is important. We must NOT allow our things to be taken down. It might be, from a technical perspective, that peer-to-peer is NOT fast enough for Bitchute. From my technical viewpoint, I suspect this is the real answer … that if it was true peer-to-peer, the speed would be far too slow. It would be like a slow torrent and people would not support it. Bitchute therefore runs from its own servers, which it clearly must be paying for. So realise too, the struggle they have to keep bitchute going and that the owners of Bitchute, like myself, Alex and others, that we have to dive in and foot the bills and make the decisions that allow us to keep functioning. I think the internet is not fast enough for peer-to-peer. So that may be why they run with servers. In fact, when you upload a video to Bitchute, look at the URL you get in your browser. You'll see that Bitchute has several servers and it randomly allocates one to you for when you do an upload. So there is definitely a lot of centralisation in Bitchute, and it probably is so because otherwise people would not support it. Those are my thoughts. There may also be other reasons why Bitchute still claims to have this technology, and I suspect at the end of the day they're just doing their best for whites. I have faith in them. I hope they can survive the terrible Jewish censorship they're undergoing. Jan]
Here is what wikipedia had to say about someone who looked into Bitchute’s peer-to-peer technology claims:
BitChute does not rely on advertising, and users can send payments to video creators directly. Since its launch, the site has promoted its use of the peer-to-peer technology WebTorrent as a means to decentralize hosting and reduce costs.
An analysis conducted by Fredrick Brennan in November 2019, published in The Daily Dot, failed to find any evidence of peer-to-peer data transfer in BitChute’s videos; all videos Brennan downloaded came directly from BitChute’s servers, with no part of the videos received from peers. According to Brennan, magnet links on the site don’t work. Brennan challenged BitChute’s use of the word "delist" to describe deplatforming users, saying that the wording is misleading in that it makes BitChute seem falsely similar to BitTorrent (where a site maintains one "list" of content, but independent trackers may be created as well), when in reality BitChute is just deleting a user’s videos from the BitChute site.