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

I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

blog.samuelmaddock.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 632 posts

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#141

Post by pmontra »

sherincall wrote: post #116
mcv wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So how do open source browsers like Chromium and Firefox do this? Surely if they have access to the blackbox, then anyone does? And if they don't, it means you can't watch Netflix on some major browsers.

Not sure if it's still the case, but it used to be that Firefox on Linux could only stream 720p videos.

Firefox on Ubuntu 16.04 NVIDIA proprietary driver here. I searched for 1080p on YouTube and the first result is this harmless video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQuhA5ZCV9M It started at 720p, then I switched it to 1080p and it started playing at that resolution. However I didn't count the lines and I don't know if this is the kind of streaming you're writing about. Maybe Netflix? I can't check that.

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#142

Post by ambicapter »

kllrnohj wrote: post #59
ambicapter wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just from creating a browser with a reasonable feature set, like, say, the ability to play non-obscure videos.

Why can't the author do the same thing Firefox does, which also uses Widevine DRM with no issues?

RTFA. Widevine is owned by Google. Google gives Firefox permission to use Widevine. Google took 4 months to give this individual a one-line rejection, ostensibly his only option for supporting DRM in a chromium-based solution like the one he is using (Electron). Now what?

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#144

Post by jhasse »

tiraniddo wrote: post #92
jcranmer wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blame Google and Microsoft. They were the people who created the specification, and pushed for it, when Netflix came begging for a solution to their DRM conundrum. Even if the W3C hadn't approved it, that's two of the big four browser vendors who are committing to implementing it anyways, which is enough to guarantee a de facto standard anyways.

No, blame the movie studios, record labels etc. They're the one which require asinine DRM support for web browsers. Google/Microsoft/Apple/Adobe want to support media content, but to do so requires towing the line with the media companies otherwise they refuse to license the content (at least in HD+). Having worked with various DRM teams I know that they have to treat their code as if its the most secret code in the…

> No, blame the movie studios, record labels etc. They're the one which require asinine DRM support for web browsers. Google/Microsoft/Apple/Adobe want to support media content, but to do so requires towing the line with the media companies otherwise they refuse to license the content (at least in HD+).

Let's say Google, Microsoft and Apple announce that they will be removing any DRM from their browsers on 2020-01-01. They will also remove any DRM playback app from their App Stores. So no Netflix on PCs, Macs, iPhones, iPads or any Android device (including stuff like Android TV).

What do you think would happen?

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#145

Post by SmellyGeekBoy »

seabrookmx wrote: post #100
CaptainZapp wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree; good DRM is transparent and unnoticeable Yeah, until it isn't. I can't start GTA V for days since the "Rockstar Social Club" won't connect and glibly informs me that "I need to be on-line" I would have agreed with you until then. But not being able to play a game for which I paid full price and not being able to get meaningful support to resolve the issue rapidly changed my stance on DRM. It fucking sucks…

Nowadays you only really "license" the games, rather than own them. Sucks that it's $60+ to do so, but that's how it is.

Yet I have a whole shelf full of 30 year old console games that I can just stick into the relevant console and be playing within seconds.

Progress!

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#146

Post by Touche »

geofft wrote: post #98
Touche wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, if the Director had overridden the majority of the membership, the browser vendors would've shipped something anyway That's fine. It's better that the burden for maintaining non-standard plugins be put on the sites and browsers that choose to do that, rather than be placed on everyone else.

How would that have improved the current situation? The videos that Metastream wants to play would still have been DRM'd and would still be playable in the mainstream browsers. What would the benefit have been? What burden is being placed on people now that wouldn't be placed on people in that scenario?

The existence of features in any piece of software is a burden on further development of said software. Every time we go to add some other new feature to the spec we have to take into account how it will affect EME. That's just how software works.

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#147

Post by cmsimike »

noitsnot wrote: post #136
cmsimike wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Kodi has made amazing progress. I've not had issues getting it installed on different devices since the 15.x days. Currently run it on 4 different dedicated devices in my apartment as well as some mobile and media devices. > The docs on how to do simple things seem to be nonexistant because they don't want to be sued and shutdown entirely. What docs are you looking for? They have a very extensive wiki as well…

I didn't know it existed and it wasn't for lack of trying. I landed in the forum a few times which didn't help. Bing or Google a simple query where you would expect the official Kodi website or Wiki to show in the results. For example: "How to stream Netflix on Kodi".

Up until a few months ago, natively playing netflix was not possible with a released version of Kodi. Now it is using the link I posted!

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#148

Post by jhasse »

seabrookmx wrote: post #100
CaptainZapp wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree; good DRM is transparent and unnoticeable Yeah, until it isn't. I can't start GTA V for days since the "Rockstar Social Club" won't connect and glibly informs me that "I need to be on-line" I would have agreed with you until then. But not being able to play a game for which I paid full price and not being able to get meaningful support to resolve the issue rapidly changed my stance on DRM. It fucking sucks…

Nowadays you only really "license" the games, rather than own them. Sucks that it's $60+ to do so, but that's how it is.

There is an exception: https://www.gog.com/

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#149

Post by AnthonyMouse »

gsnedders wrote: post #139
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Making the user experience of DRM worse is better because then fewer people will use it. If the platforms all made it so that you have to solder a new chip into your phone before you can play DRM content, there would be a lot less DRM. The argument that platforms have to do this for competitive reasons is doublethink. If the experience is worse and that will cause customers to flee, how is it that they would only fle…

Would it have made the user experience of DRM any worse than it currently is, though? The DRM module would still ship with Chrome and Edge (and likely Safari too, given Apple became involved pretty quickly), you'd still need multiple different streaming formats (in the form of different DRM formats) as you do today, and maybe you'd need slightly different JS codepath per-browser too (but that's not a big difference t…

If the W3C making the right decision would make them irrelevant then what has actually happened is that they're already irrelevant, and becoming a rubber stamp on bad ideas only serves to prove that and erode their credibility.

Moreover, such organizations are made up of their members, and it's up to the members to do the right thing as well. Nobody had to volunteer to be the first to add this gunk to their browser. It can't be a competitive disadvantage if nobody else has it either, and it can't be a competitive advantage if everybody else has it, and those are the two options so why not choose the first?

Re: I tried creating a web browser, and Google blocked me

#150

Post by rohan1024 »

Zak wrote: post #101
tiraniddo wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, blame the movie studios, record labels etc. They're the one which require asinine DRM support for web browsers. Google/Microsoft/Apple/Adobe want to support media content, but to do so requires towing the line with the media companies otherwise they refuse to license the content (at least in HD+). Having worked with various DRM teams I know that they have to treat their code as if its the most secret code in the…

The weird thing about this is I can find a high-quality torrent for anything on Netflix in under a minute.

Torrent is something that I have nothing to complain about. It's decentralised. No big corporation is trying to control it. It's truly by the people for the people.

I wonder if more protocols like this will get invented and become mainstream. Or those glorious days are already behind us? Since every big corporation is just trying to grab market share by creating walled gardens for everything.

Post reply on HN