It's a matter of finding where the line between cost and user satisfaction meet.
Like sure you could limit all videos to 60fps @ 720p or 30fps @ 1080p but most everyone now wants everything 120fps @ 2160p which takes up dozens of gigs per video and eats up bandwidth.
I think a big part of that is just straight up storage space, more specially a lack thereof. Google won't release specifics but estimates put the total data stored by YouTube at somewhere near an exabyte (1 million terrabytes). Most of which is made up by video files.
Of course that's just issue number 1 of many to figure out.
Yea peertube is rough... Mostly in part due to, in my opinion at least, people wanting to make use of YouTube's ad revenue system even tho most creators I watch making most of their income via donations rather than ad revenue.
I guess I should elaborate. I look at more than just what's on the site. I'll actually go around and look for 3rd party reviews and such. It's not fool proof but I've had a much better buying experience since I've started doing that.
I look at reviews more than I look at advertising. On top of that I look at negative reviews. Most negative reviews usually have pros and cons listed or will actually go into depth about the product and it's shortcomings unlike most positive reviews that just say "it's great!"
Thankfully I can just filter their email address straight into the garbage bin but it's still ridiculous.
With the advent of the internet and a bit of sailing the high seas it wasn't hard to get a hold of em anyway.
God... Imagine being in the middle of an important call for say discussing family affairs for a dying family member and you just hear "there will be a 30 second advertisement break in 1 minute."... I'd probably pop a blood vessel.