Live data from Hacker News

Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

techblog.netflix.com

191–200 of 524 posts

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#191
post #2

Translation: Netflix successfully lobied DRM into what is supposed to be the OPEN web standard, to the point where even Firefox couldn't afford not to support it. Dark days for the free exchange of information enabled by the web.

I don't know if I'm just looking too far into your comment, but I don't see why you're blaming Netflix (or it seems you are) or how you got to them being the bad guys for this? They're not the ones that make the content. If it was up to Netflix, they would just release their shows DRM-free on Netflix for any platform. Unfortunately, that's not how things work and they have to bow to the demands of the content distrib…

> If it was up to Netflix, they would just release their shows DRM-free on Netflix for any platform.

What evidence do you have to back this ? It's not like Netflix's own content is available DRM free. Corollary: If you are a content owner and want your content to be available DRM-free on Netflix, will Netflix make a provision for you ? I hate these generalizations that people make. Just because a company (like Netflix) is more tech-savvy than the average media house and makes a few blogs and OSS projects that run on BSD or Linux, it doesn't make them any better for the end user.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#192
This may be an extreme view, but have you ever wondered why DRM exists?

It exists because highly intelligent people designed it, developed it, and encoded it as software, in exchange for money. Period.

Ok - that's a simplification, but it isn't too far from the truth. These people (short of some kind of compartmentalized R&D model where nobody knew the complete picture - which I doubt happened in this case) each were intelligent enough to think to themselves, and even discuss among themselves, where this all could end up. Where it could lead, what the ultimate goal could happen.

In short - had they given it some thought, they would've been able to see the arguments against and for DRM, and how it could potentially affect consumers, users, and everything else...what we are arguing about today, and have been for a long while now.

So - if they could do this - why did they take the next step, then the next, and so on?

Sure - they needed to eat and pay bills, but we're not talking about had they not implemented it, that they would be instantly unemployed in the industry. They could have each said "I will not do this", and foregone the money.

Of course, the industry could have countered with larger and larger payouts; but if you were in the hot seat, and you had an idea where things would lead, and you didn't like that idea - what amount of money would've made you change your mind to sell out the future?

At what point does the money outweigh your values?

If you are someone in one of these positions, where you know or have an idea of what might come down the pipe in the future (or you know someone in such a position), if you honestly disagree with all of that, you need to make a choice, or speak to others, or whatever. You need to say to yourself, to your colleagues and/or friends in the business that "yes - I will compromise my values for this money" (or if not money, whatever compensation is being offered or procured). You need to be honest about that to yourself and others - no excuses.

Or you must resist, and say "no amount of money will make me change my values; my name and reputation are worth much more than that".

Here's a thought - would you shake the hand of the developer(s) of DVD/CSS, or would you look at them quizzically, and ask them scornfully "why?". Would you shake Jack Valenti's hand and tell him "Nice job!"? (yes I know he's dead)

Ultimately - what I'm trying to get at - it isn't an "us vs. them" situation. It really is "us" and "us" only. We continue to support this, as we continue to rail against it.

I'm not saying if we did anything differently things would have changed. Most humans on the planet honestly don't give a crap about others, about future others, about the political and social consequences of their actions, thoughts and deeds in the now. They barely care about themselves. But if -you- do care about this issue (and a myriad of others), you need to ask yourself whether you support it or not, and if not, what it would take to buy you off - and whether you could live with that.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#193
post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That wasn't his central point I don't think, also Flash and Silverlight where largely beaten by the Open Web because they never got the adoption sufficient to rival it. So instead they lobbied for it to be built in, the day will come when view source won't work anymore because everything fed down will protected by DRM and we moved another step closer to turning the web into a gigantic walled garden for whoever the in…

> That wasn't his central point I don't think, also Flash and Silverlight where largely beaten by the Open Web because they never got the adoption sufficient to rival it. this is a false statement, Flash was ubiquitous. Still today every chrome user on desktop has a flash player. Obviously, this isn't true for mobile, but before the mobile era flash was basically on every Windows and Mac computer with a browser.

Merely been installed isn't adoption, if 99% of my web time is using HTML/JS to render content and 1% of that time Flash then do the web browser and flash have the same adoption?.

By that metric notepad would be the most adopted programmer text editor in the world..

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#194

This is the strategy Microsoft tried over a decade ago with ActiveX. And Firefox saved us. It was starting to be normalized, to have to install ActiveX controls to view certain content. Companies like CinemaNow[1] offered Netflix-like streaming movie services using Microsoft's ActiveX based Janus DRM over a decade ago. Thankfully, the community had more of a backbone back then. Firefox and Linux were not broken becau…

> It's only a matter of time until Firefox is just a wrapper for webkit

This tired "Firefox is just turning into Chrome because Australis/DRM/web extensions/xkcd 1172" hyperbole simply couldn't be further from the truth. Mozilla is building an entirely new rendering engine with Servo [1], parts of which will be shipping in Firefox this year [2].

[1] https://servo.org/ [2] https://wiki.mozilla.org/Quantum

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would think you could hook into X11 to do this quite nicely.

Problem is that grabbing the last frame buffer would mean you're doing it post decompression. To distribute something you grabbed like that you'd need to recompress it and then have a generation degradation of lossy compression.

That's not how that works.

It's one thing if you're converting from one compressed format to another, or recompressing an already compressed file.

It's another to simply grab the pixels off of screen and compress those. You won't get as good of a shot because of the original decompression, but your description of why is inaccurate.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#196

This is the strategy Microsoft tried over a decade ago with ActiveX. And Firefox saved us. It was starting to be normalized, to have to install ActiveX controls to view certain content. Companies like CinemaNow[1] offered Netflix-like streaming movie services using Microsoft's ActiveX based Janus DRM over a decade ago. Thankfully, the community had more of a backbone back then. Firefox and Linux were not broken becau…

> Now, the same thing is happening again, except that Mozilla is on board with it. Mozilla doesn't have as much leverage now that a large part of "the community" has abandoned Firefox for Chrome. If you care about these issues, stop and consider the effect of your choice in user agent. > It's only a matter of time until Firefox is just a wrapper for webkit It will be a very cold day in hell before this happens. Mozil…

> It will be a very cold day in hell before this happens.

I hope you're properly bundled up.

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/ios/

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#197
post #52

They really needed DRM to survive. It's great that they can run a sandbox in my computer so I can watch videos, something which wasn't possible with the open web standards. By the way, here's the list of titles which weren't pirated thanks to DRM: .

I don't get it. I can still make a recording of my screen can't I?

The purpose of DRM is not to stop piracy, but to have legal and technical leverage over player makers:

https://plus.google.com/+IanHickson/posts/iPmatxBYuj2

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#198
post #2

Translation: Netflix successfully lobied DRM into what is supposed to be the OPEN web standard, to the point where even Firefox couldn't afford not to support it. Dark days for the free exchange of information enabled by the web.

I don't know if I'm just looking too far into your comment, but I don't see why you're blaming Netflix (or it seems you are) or how you got to them being the bad guys for this? They're not the ones that make the content. If it was up to Netflix, they would just release their shows DRM-free on Netflix for any platform. Unfortunately, that's not how things work and they have to bow to the demands of the content distrib…

1. they make content too. but regardless...

2. they are the middle man for content. they are exactly the group that benefit most from drm.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#199
post #2

Translation: Netflix successfully lobied DRM into what is supposed to be the OPEN web standard, to the point where even Firefox couldn't afford not to support it. Dark days for the free exchange of information enabled by the web.

All frontiers close. The response suggested by history, if you prefer life on the frontier, is to find a new one.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but unfortunately that's unrealistic. Why is it unrealistic? Hollywood just needs to be pushed harder. It worked for music no?

Did it? I have a feeling we're about to see more DRM with music. All the pieces are falling into place. Files get replaced with streaming (which is to files what a service is to a product), and I wonder how long it will take before more companies will follow Apple's suit by ditching the audio jack. Going full digital there will enable companies to set up fully DRMed path from memory to speakers/headphones, like they…

> to set up fully DRMed path from memory to speakers/headphones

Unlike with video, where the signal ends up unencrypted only on the very last chip in the chain, namely the one that drives the (I'm taking a guess here!) thousands of pixel lines, this is not practical with audio signals - you can always intercept and easily record the signal in analog form, either right before the PA stage or if this does not work (because the D/A converter and PA are implemented on one chip) after the PA output. The signal will of course be affected by the PA frequency characteristics, but that can be compensated for - and you still get a perfect audio signal.

Also, I highly doubt that professional/semi-professional home theater setups will ever ship with "smart" (i.e. more wires than just the +/- heavy-gauge, direct speaker power signal wires) speakers, so you get the analog hole right there, on the output matrix of the amp.

Post reply on HN