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

Show HN: Lightspeed – subsecond, open source, self hosted stream from OBS

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 141 posts

Re: Show HN: Lightspeed – subsecond, open source, self hosted stream from OBS

#71

Post by hnlmorg »

morsch wrote: post #67
hnlmorg wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except for Jackbox Party games it's by far the best fit. It's even the recommended way to play online by Jackbox themselves and I've hosted Jackbox via both Zoom and MS Teams and it worked perfectly fine that way. Other online games wouldn't fair so well but the dropped frame rate in Jackbox Party games does not hamper the playability of their games at all.

They recommend doing it that way, because what else are they going to do, post a tutorial on how to do it via OBS? I don't think so. Maybe Zoom and MS Teams offer(ed) a better fidelity. For one thing, Zoom lets you share desktop audio along with the screen. In fact, apparently these days, Jitsi can do that too, that definitely wasn't possible when I tried it early last year. At that time, at least, the experience OBS…

> They recommend doing it that way, because what else are they going to do, post a tutorial on how to do it via OBS? I don't think so.

I think you're being rather unfavourable there. The Jackbox developers have been pretty responsive listening to user feedback in the past. For example Linux support was added after several requests on Steam forums. They've also added other features like subtitles specifically for streaming via video conferencing solutions. So if Zoom / Teams / etc didn't work well then you can bet they'd have posted another workaround and/or a game patch since the alternative is they'd lose a lot of potential business in 2020.

As I'd said, I'd used it fine over both Zoom and Teams (multiple times on both in fact) and the only reason I even bought Jackbox Party games was because several different work colleagues (I think it might have been 3 different people) recommended it to me after they had played their own games (individually) over Zoom and other conferencing solutions.

I don't have any experience with Jitsi so maybe the issues you were having were Jitsi specific? Maybe, being a techie, Jitsi was already "good enough" but you thought you could improve upon it a little and ended up over-engineering a solution? (we've all fallen into that trap -- when you spend your entire life building enterprise solutions it's sometimes hard to take a step back. Particularly when it's something as fun as OBS). Or maybe there was some issue with Linux? All I know is that myself and everyone I know has had zero issues hosting using Jackbox's recommended approach.

Re: Show HN: Lightspeed – subsecond, open source, self hosted stream from OBS

#72

Post by naikrovek »

GRVYDEV wrote: post #61
j1elo wrote: post #50

About the choice of license (MIT): could you share your considerations about it? (if any) It's a topic I'm interested in. Mainly to see examples (and learn from them) about when people prefer lax licenses on the style of "do what you want with this, including a closed-source proprietary business" (MIT, Apache) which has allowed in the past that big Co's. benefit from it without giving back (lots of cases in HN), vs.…

Would I like a strong open source community? Absolutely, could you fork this and make money off of it right now? No not even close. Maybe in the future I would consider a different license but at the end of the day if you take this and make it profitable good for you :) my goal wasn’t to make money

I am also pro-MIT. For me, "freedom" doesn't mean "restricting what users can do."

GPL restricts what users can do, and thus restricts freedom in my eyes.

Not sure why anyone would care but it seemed like a good time to explain my thoughts on that while agreeing with you.

This kind of thing has been needed for some time, so thank you for creating it.

Re: Show HN: Lightspeed – subsecond, open source, self hosted stream from OBS

#73

Post by naikrovek »

rapsey wrote: post #48
morsch wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Awesome! I was looking for something like this when trying to play a local multiplayer game via the Internet in an early lockdown. There are, or were, no good turnkey solutions for this. Twitch and Youtube have 5-10s latency, which is often not good enough. Mixer promised (and presumably delivered) ~1s latency using the FTL protocol you use, but they had a wait list of a couple of days or weeks, and of course now, th…

Why do you need such low latency for live streaming? For the majority of cases 10s latency does not really matter.

Interactivity with viewers.

The best streaming experience for both streamer and viewers is when they can interact, and any latency over 500ms or so makes that a true challenge if you're trying to have a conversation where context is important.

Being an introvert that doesn't like it when people pay attention to them at all for any reason, I haven't really experienced this, but that's what everyone says.

Re: Show HN: Lightspeed – subsecond, open source, self hosted stream from OBS

#74

Post by naikrovek »

Warchamp7 wrote: post #46
morsch wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Awesome! I was looking for something like this when trying to play a local multiplayer game via the Internet in an early lockdown. There are, or were, no good turnkey solutions for this. Twitch and Youtube have 5-10s latency, which is often not good enough. Mixer promised (and presumably delivered) ~1s latency using the FTL protocol you use, but they had a wait list of a couple of days or weeks, and of course now, th…

Have you tried Discords GoLive sharing?

That requires that viewers use Discord, which may cause problems for some, even though Discord is huge anymore.

The posted solution requires only a web browser for the viewer, and OBS for the streamer.

Re: Show HN: Lightspeed – subsecond, open source, self hosted stream from OBS

#75

Post by Brian_K_White »

naikrovek wrote: post #72
GRVYDEV wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would I like a strong open source community? Absolutely, could you fork this and make money off of it right now? No not even close. Maybe in the future I would consider a different license but at the end of the day if you take this and make it profitable good for you :) my goal wasn’t to make money

I am also pro-MIT. For me, "freedom" doesn't mean "restricting what users can do." GPL restricts what users can do, and thus restricts freedom in my eyes. Not sure why anyone would care but it seemed like a good time to explain my thoughts on that while agreeing with you. This kind of thing has been needed for some time, so thank you for creating it.

MIT freedom is like the freedom to enslave.

Restricting the freedom to use your work to restrict others' freedom, is not nearly so onerous or hypocritical as GPL bemoaners try to characterize it.

I feel absolutely zero sympathy for the argument.

Re: Show HN: Lightspeed – subsecond, open source, self hosted stream from OBS

#76

Post by naikrovek »

corobo wrote: post #43
te_chris wrote: post #33

Could this mix multiple obs streams from different origins? My friends and I put on a NYE stream party but it was actually a massive faff finding something that could mix multiple remote streams into one. Would love to be able to self host something to do it A simple switch is fine in this case, no overlays or anything

Obs-ndi. Output all the sources you need over NDI. Use them as sources in OBS.

NDI is exactly right. It was designed for that.

Re: Show HN: Lightspeed – subsecond, open source, self hosted stream from OBS

#77

Post by j1elo »

GRVYDEV wrote: post #61
j1elo wrote: post #50

About the choice of license (MIT): could you share your considerations about it? (if any) It's a topic I'm interested in. Mainly to see examples (and learn from them) about when people prefer lax licenses on the style of "do what you want with this, including a closed-source proprietary business" (MIT, Apache) which has allowed in the past that big Co's. benefit from it without giving back (lots of cases in HN), vs.…

Would I like a strong open source community? Absolutely, could you fork this and make money off of it right now? No not even close. Maybe in the future I would consider a different license but at the end of the day if you take this and make it profitable good for you :) my goal wasn’t to make money

Thanks!

As I said, I'm not trying to push for this or that license, just want to have a perspective of the choice for new OSS projects.

Mostly the usual lesson is that authors typically don't really think through much about the licensing choice when they are hyped about an upcoming first release. Technical concerns are, understandably, what gets most attention at the beginning. Your position is the most common one I've found for small-ish projects.

Re: Show HN: Lightspeed – subsecond, open source, self hosted stream from OBS

#78

Post by j1elo »

naikrovek wrote: post #72
GRVYDEV wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would I like a strong open source community? Absolutely, could you fork this and make money off of it right now? No not even close. Maybe in the future I would consider a different license but at the end of the day if you take this and make it profitable good for you :) my goal wasn’t to make money

I am also pro-MIT. For me, "freedom" doesn't mean "restricting what users can do." GPL restricts what users can do, and thus restricts freedom in my eyes. Not sure why anyone would care but it seemed like a good time to explain my thoughts on that while agreeing with you. This kind of thing has been needed for some time, so thank you for creating it.

Realize how I oriented my question around how it might affect building an OSS community.

A MIT or Apache license might detract contributors, because essentially these licenses say "your contribution is OSS today, but it might end up resulting as unintended free labor that helps build a commercial product of which you won't be part of".

However some see GPL licenses as a guarantee that external contributions are actually contributions to the overall Open-Source community as a whole, because they cannot be turned into other non-OSS product without explicit permission of all people who built it.

So yes, copyleft is more restrictive than non-copyleft. But only in the subtle sense of ensuring that no further restrictions will get added by any third party, ever. Which is a strong promise that should encourage contributions.

Ultimately, my objective is to learn if this theory matches the practice.

Re: Show HN: Lightspeed – subsecond, open source, self hosted stream from OBS

#79

Post by TheChaplain »

naikrovek wrote: post #72
GRVYDEV wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would I like a strong open source community? Absolutely, could you fork this and make money off of it right now? No not even close. Maybe in the future I would consider a different license but at the end of the day if you take this and make it profitable good for you :) my goal wasn’t to make money

I am also pro-MIT. For me, "freedom" doesn't mean "restricting what users can do." GPL restricts what users can do, and thus restricts freedom in my eyes. Not sure why anyone would care but it seemed like a good time to explain my thoughts on that while agreeing with you. This kind of thing has been needed for some time, so thank you for creating it.

Actually those who prefer GPL see things from the perspective of the code, not the users.

GPL ensures the code is freely available at all times, and anyone can use it, change it, distribute it but not take it away or restrict access to it.

From the code pov, MIT/Apache is freedom to take away and restrict access.

Post reply on HN