Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

techblog.netflix.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 524 posts

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#221

Post by jshmrsn »

braveo wrote: post #195
algesten wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

algesten's comment seems entirely accurate to me. He's not claiming that the captured frame buffer will be of lower quality, but that in order to distribute it afterwords, you would need to recompress the captured frames. That recompression is where the quality reduction would occur.

Everything I just said is rephrasing what is already in algesten's comment.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#222

Post by greenhouse_gas »

djrogers wrote: post #189
greenhouse_gas wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is that there is (for all intents and purposes) no difference between ECE and plugins. Actually, ECE is a plugin. The only difference is that it helps web-designers switch plugin providers. That's it. No more security. No more standardization. As a user, you still depend on the goodwill of the ECE provider throw you a bone. If you use a slightly niche OS (say, OpenBSD on ARM), you're out of luck. If Adobe d…

I completely understand and sympathize with your point, however this: "If you use a slightly niche OS (say, OpenBSD on ARM)" Is rather hilarious - calling OpenBSD on ARM a 'slightly niche' OS in the context of 'operating systems people use to watch video on the web' is rather ambitious, don't you think? OpenBSD on ARM would have to increase it's user base in this arena by a couple orders of magnitude to elevate itsel…

I picked two relativity popular platforms, though niche together to focus on the danger. All the more so would something like the rust os have problems.

The bigger issue will be when these providers will start holding OS's hostage (well, you want to view half the web? You've got to have a locked bootloader and only I have the key. You want to index our sites? Google has permission (the unlocking key) but not you).

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#223

Post by tptacek »

BuuQu9hu wrote: post #190
tptacek wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that's different from a web page that won't allow you to access it without a password, how? In both cases, a business decision by a third party limits what you're able to access. I understand that you don't want to run code Netflix approves of and that you're not permitted to read in its original source form. And that's fine, a good reason not to subscribe to Netflix. But how is that any more an offense to "the o…

What you're missing is that passwords don't require blobs. The ContentDecryptionModules used for DRM on the Web are blobs. For a browser to run a blob, there needs to be an interface between the browser and the blob. Flash and Silverlight blobs used a standard interface: NPAPI. Any browser implementing NPAPI could run the blobs (assuming the blob was compatible with the host OS). CDMs have no such standard browser/bl…

I don't think I'm missing it, so much as I'm not understanding what the material difference is between your unwillingness to run a blob on your machine versus your unwillingness to do any of the other things a business might require before issuing you a password.

You are free not to run those blobs, and not to use Netflix's services. Where you lose me is the militant demand that Netflix not offer services to those willing to run the blob.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#224

Post by nkristoffersen »

BuuQu9hu wrote: post #190
tptacek wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that's different from a web page that won't allow you to access it without a password, how? In both cases, a business decision by a third party limits what you're able to access. I understand that you don't want to run code Netflix approves of and that you're not permitted to read in its original source form. And that's fine, a good reason not to subscribe to Netflix. But how is that any more an offense to "the o…

What you're missing is that passwords don't require blobs. The ContentDecryptionModules used for DRM on the Web are blobs. For a browser to run a blob, there needs to be an interface between the browser and the blob. Flash and Silverlight blobs used a standard interface: NPAPI. Any browser implementing NPAPI could run the blobs (assuming the blob was compatible with the host OS). CDMs have no such standard browser/bl…

Weird, the internet I know and love has plenty of issues with browser compatibility :-)

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#225

Post by MBCook »

cgearhart wrote: post #205
MBCook wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To a huge chunk of users video IS the web. If Netflix, Hulu, and YouTube didn't work (assume YT adopts DRM) the browser would basically be DOA for a HUGE chunk of people.

So...the _entire_ web should be saddled with DRM because people who don't care about the web wouldn't use it otherwise? Is the web better now because all those people now have _another_ way to passively consume video content?

That argument works both ways. _NO ONE_ should have the option to view copyrighted videos because you don't want it?

Yes, I think this improves the web. You no longer need the unmaintained disaster that was silverlight or the resource vampire and exploit factory that was flash. Users can choose to view this content in a safeER way than before.

The only good argument against this is the 'we don't need DRM ' argument, but that hinges on the ability to get content you want in a non-DRM format and it seems clear that isn't happening anytime soon thanks to Hollywood et. al and I don't blame them.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#226

Post by packetslave »

the8472 wrote: post #196
mintplant wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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/

ALL web browsers on (non-jailbreak) IOS are a wrapper around Webkit. Apple won't allow anything else.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#228

Post by nkristoffersen »

Is there a better method for protecting content provided by Netflix?

Just being realistic. DRM is a necessary evil in that video studios would never ever provide content in the clear.

I am so happy to see flash go the way of the Dodo. But curious what the best alternative is for implementing DRM on the web?

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#229

Post by greenhouse_gas »

nikcub wrote: post #165
jasonkostempski wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be better if the platforms that wanted DRM just made their own damn desktop apps, just like they make their own iOS apps, Android apps, Roku apps, smart tv apps, etc. There's no reason for them to be embedded in a browser.

Because the browser provides a privacy and security sandbox where you can't be fingerprinted and where it is more difficult to turn decoding bugs into remote code execution exploits. Users should have a lot more faith in the protections of a browser over the free-for-all security and privacy nightmare that is desktop computing.

Who told you it's going to be sandboxed? It's probably going to be a obfuscated binary blob (it has to of it wants to try ensure that nothing is intercepting it) which will try verifying that OS isn't intercepting data.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#230

Post by mavrc »

daenney wrote: post #183
blitmap wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is DRM has been used for more than digital rights management. We've seen it used to surveill the user and collect information - and restrict actions on the users' computer when it thinks you're doing something illicit (not allowing you to burn things to disc, restricting the ability to screenshot videos, uninstalling/deleting programs, adding rootkits, etc). Far outside the scope of providing authorized a…

> What's terrible is Netflix could have used it's considerable influence to tell _that_ _Industry_ that we won't walk this walk anymore. Why do you assume they didn't? And if they did and the industry said no, what should they have done? Walk away, lose access to all its content, see a large part of their subscriber base move to different services that do support DRM and therefor get the content and eventually have t…

> And if they did and the industry said no, what should they have done?

Distribute industry content with DRM, distribute their own content without, and see what the results are.

Somebody's going to have to perform the experiment to see what the outcome will be. Since Netflix produces tons of content now, they are in an excellent position to try this.

Post reply on HN