Background Features in Google Meet, Powered by Web ML • Hacker News Board

Re: Background Features in Google Meet, Powered by Web ML

#231

Post by vorpalhex » Mon, Nov 02, 2020, 4:14 PM UTC

coding_unit_1 wrote: post #142

mcv wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. Everybody does this. In anything using video, UI elements apparently need to be hidden as much as possible. In virtual meetings, Youtube, and it's often an option in games. And sometimes it's great, because you get to focus on the content, and sometimes it's not, because you lose control. It's something that should be optional or configurable. It's great to have shortcuts for the most common commands (like s…

I don't disagree, but all the video conferencing tools have a shortcut for mute/unmute. Google Meet included (Cmd+D on a Mac).

Which also happens to be the shortcut for bookmarking webpages in most browsers... and Meet doesn't let you rebind this to something sane like spacebar.

Re: Background Features in Google Meet, Powered by Web ML

#232

Post by lern_too_spel » Mon, Nov 02, 2020, 4:16 PM UTC

Why isn't Mediapipe built on gstreamer? Nvidia gets this right. If you're slinging frame buffers around, use an API that there is already an ecosystem for.

Re: Background Features in Google Meet, Powered by Web ML

#233

Post by lima » Mon, Nov 02, 2020, 4:21 PM UTC

tortasaur wrote: post #209

lima wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious to hear why? Google Meet is the only web-based videoconferencing product that works well for us without audio dropouts or random issues. Zoom's web client is particularly terrible, and we can't install the desktop client for security reasons. And the new background noise cancellation feature is magic.

We haven't run into issues with a self-hosted instance of Jitsi Meet. Might be worth a look.

We used to use Jitsi Meet and it worked perfectly for our team meetings, but we kept having issues with 10+ participants, overseas meetings with 100ms+ latency, and whenever Firefox was used. YMMV, one year ago.

Re: Background Features in Google Meet, Powered by Web ML

#234

Post by m4rtink » Mon, Nov 02, 2020, 4:25 PM UTC

vorpalhex wrote: post #231

coding_unit_1 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't disagree, but all the video conferencing tools have a shortcut for mute/unmute. Google Meet included (Cmd+D on a Mac).

Which also happens to be the shortcut for bookmarking webpages in most browsers... and Meet doesn't let you rebind this to something sane like spacebar.

Not to mention the window might not have focus when you need to use it, making it preatty unreliable.

Re: Background Features in Google Meet, Powered by Web ML

#235

Post by acdha » Mon, Nov 02, 2020, 4:30 PM UTC

sjs7007 wrote: post #217

acdha wrote: post #216

It’s funny how Google pours time into things like this but the last person I know who uses a Google chat product just stopped because it’s less reliable than Zoom. Losing 15 minutes with someone trying to get the sound working counts more than a gimmick many people never notice, not to mention now even normal people don’t want to yet install another app because they expect it to be cancelled soon.

Most corporate employees probably don't even have a choice of which app they can use though. They are tied in by whatever their company chose.

This is only true to the extent that the IT department has complete control and is insulated from user opinion. That tends to result in choices like WebEx or the ever popular shadow IT option. This is especially true now that everyone is doing this and the odds approach certainty that if someone is having problems they’ll suggest switching to a different product they know works.

Given the number of IT people I’ve heard express concerns about UI quality and eventual cancellation even for enterprise purchases, it’s also far from a given that the IT department is just blindly pushing a product.

Re: Background Features in Google Meet, Powered by Web ML

#236

Post by brainless » Mon, Nov 02, 2020, 4:35 PM UTC

dharma1 wrote: post #15

Sony released some software a couple of months ago that lets you use most of their DSLRs as webcams with USB. My goodness, paired with a fast lens, what a difference to my MacBook webcam, even with these ml blurred backgrounds! It's only 720p and around 15fps but real shallow dof, very little sensor noise, autofocus works. Well worth trying if you have a Sony camera from the last few years. Sensor size and good optic…

I use my Android (Redmi Note 8 Pro) primary cam (720p I think) using Droidcam and it works like a charm on Linux.

I also tried gPhoto2/ffmpeg and virtual cam driver with Nikon D5200 (USB) on Linux but I prefer the Redmi since I do not have a decent low light lens for my DSLR.

Re: Background Features in Google Meet, Powered by Web ML

#237

Post by Spooks » Mon, Nov 02, 2020, 4:35 PM UTC

0xffff2 wrote: post #225

spurgu wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the apartment is a mess in general. Table full of empty cans of beer. A dildo on a chair. Your wife randomly walking by in her underwear (not sure whether this would be unblurred?). In the above scenarios, if I'm not certain there aren't going to be ackward things in behind me, I'd want to blur or set a custom background. Back against a wall also works which is what a lot of people seem to be doing.

Why not just turn off your camera? The blurring tech doesn't seem nearly reliable enough for me to trust it if my "office" was that much of a catastrophe.

I think because seeing someone's face is more important than seeing their background

Re: Background Features in Google Meet, Powered by Web ML

#238

Post by canada_dry » Mon, Nov 02, 2020, 4:45 PM UTC

robotmay wrote: post #123

atoav wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worked as a freelance graphic artist/web designer once and while I wasn't bad at the job, I really hated one aspect of it: Everybody and their kid thought they knew better than I did. When I said: "Yeah but this should really be visible, because accessibility", they would say: " But it looks better if..." People in high paid position certainly want "has taste" and "knows what looks good" to be part of their self im…

Ah ha, someone with the same experience as me. My degree is in Graphic Design, but I immediately ditched the idea of using it after university and took up programming instead because everyone has a fucking opinion when it comes to design.

> took up programming instead because everyone has a fucking opinion when it comes to design

I'm guessing code peer-reviews aren't a think at your org.

Re: Background Features in Google Meet, Powered by Web ML

#239

Post by rplnt » Mon, Nov 02, 2020, 5:01 PM UTC

tantalor wrote: post #211

rplnt wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Meet UX is the worst. Except WebEx which is somehow even worse. But WebEx is at least "complicated" and bad, Meet is just bad. Out of these I'm really surprised how "not as horrible" MS Teams are. Loads of functionality and the UX is bearable.

Can you elaborate your criticism? Meet seems fine to me.

Basically what other comments suggested. The popup menu that shows every time I move with the cursor and covers part of the screen. Can't be hidden on demand. Shows status I can't see without opening it (and covering part of the screen). Can't change my mute status without opening it (and covering part of the screen) or using a very obscure shortcut.

Re: Background Features in Google Meet, Powered by Web ML

#240

Post by lotsofpulp » Mon, Nov 02, 2020, 5:02 PM UTC

tsycho wrote: post #220

Having used both Zoom and Meet extensively now for the past 6 months, my experience is: 1/ Your internet connection, especially upload bandwidth and latency matter a lot. 2/ Zoom's desktop app performs very well, but its web version is atrocious. Not just because of the dark patterns they use to force you to install the desktop app, but also its performance is terrible compared to its desktop version, as well as wors…

>1/ Your internet connection, especially upload bandwidth and latency matter a lot.

It grates me when people claim DSL/cable qualifies as sufficiently good broadband in the US because of the lack of upload bandwidth and slow latency (can add packet loss in here too). The situation is so bad that you can't even find how much upload bandwidth so called "broadband" cable ISPs offer.

The experience on symmetric fiber connections is noticeably improved, and we can have a house with a whole group of people streaming video up and down simultaneously without a hiccup. Such as in times of work from home and school from home.