More details here: http://blog.4chan.org/post/81896300203/webm-support-on-4chan
Why isn't it possible to play the video inline?
WebM support on 4chan
31–40 of 104 posts
Re: WebM support on 4chan
#32More details here: http://blog.4chan.org/post/81896300203/webm-support-on-4chan
What other reasons were there to limit videos to 2 minutes, without audio? They certainly aren't technical limits.
The commons reasons cited on 4chan are:
1. All videos with sound would be "screamers", where the audio would get really loud unexpectedly halfway through, as a simple troll.
2. 4chan is an _image_ board, not a video board.
3. the MPAA and other copyright holders would crush 4chan with DCMA takedown requests for audio.
I feel like (1) could be solved technically with auto-mute and/or a soundcloud-style visible meter, as well as the novelty eventually wearing off.
For (2), it seems that 4chan's main goal of ephemeral content/anonymity would overrule the historical precedent for content on the site (and already does, if /f/ is any indication). If it works for vine/snapchat, why not 4chan?
(3) though seems like the major issue, especially for +2 minute videos.
Re: WebM support on 4chan
#33This is a very big moment for WebM. I feel 4chan has become the 'porn' industry of the internet. With VHS vs Betamax the largely deciding factor was which standard porn supported (this was again to a lesser extent with bluray). The general lack of adoption of animated png's is often pointed squarely on 4chan. Since it generated most of the web's viral funny content. And since most of it was in .gif, who needs to supp…
I'd say Google has its own share of responsibility for the lack of adoption of APNGs. Chromium doesn't support them out of the box.
I suppose because that requires using libapng instead of libpng, maybe?
Re: WebM support on 4chan
#34Has anyone had experience optimizing for webm? I really want to support this codec, but it's insanely slow in my experience. I'm finding that it's generally around 4x slower than mp4, but I've also had cases where it's taken up to a minute to encode a file where h264 take under 10 seconds. My use case is to have the best performance/quality ratio for a 30 second video under 3mb. These are my ffmpeg flags: h264: "-vco…
I don't know the details, but how is the quality on both? I can image that webm takes longer, but if it creates a file that has a higher visual quality for the same filesize that is great. I think nearly all streaming providers would take an increase in processing time for a decrease in bandwith, while quality stays the same..
Re: WebM support on 4chan
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Moot, fix the mime type of those pages. On Android it opens the new url on the browser and only when the browser got the file header it calls the video app to start the download again. I'm pretty sure there are ways for the link to go directly to the video app
We already send the proper MIME type: Content-Type: video/webm
Android is dumb then... Not surprised.
Re: WebM support on 4chan
#36This is a very big moment for WebM. I feel 4chan has become the 'porn' industry of the internet. With VHS vs Betamax the largely deciding factor was which standard porn supported (this was again to a lesser extent with bluray). The general lack of adoption of animated png's is often pointed squarely on 4chan. Since it generated most of the web's viral funny content. And since most of it was in .gif, who needs to supp…
> I feel 4chan has become the 'porn' industry of the internet. This is the most flattering thing I've ever read about 4chan.
Porn industry? Isn't 4Chan an ocean of something or another?
Re: WebM support on 4chan
#37Why not use a tag with the 'loop' attribute to better simulate animated GIFs?
and then, instead of using a browser, use a platform specific app. Persist user agent data so you can remove the captcha, and it will be just like the original 4chan.
Re: WebM support on 4chan
#38Has anyone had experience optimizing for webm? I really want to support this codec, but it's insanely slow in my experience. I'm finding that it's generally around 4x slower than mp4, but I've also had cases where it's taken up to a minute to encode a file where h264 take under 10 seconds. My use case is to have the best performance/quality ratio for a 30 second video under 3mb. These are my ffmpeg flags: h264: "-vco…
I don't know the details, but how is the quality on both? I can image that webm takes longer, but if it creates a file that has a higher visual quality for the same filesize that is great. I think nearly all streaming providers would take an increase in processing time for a decrease in bandwith, while quality stays the same..
They are of comparable quality. I find the h264 slightly better, but I have not done extensive testing.
I did try dropping the quality significantly with my webm profile, but it had a trivial performance improvement.
Re: WebM support on 4chan
#39Any reason to not support h264, which seems to have similar levels of browser support? (trades Firefox on Linux/OS X/WinVista for support on IE/Safari/iOS/Android)
Probably he cares about software freedom?
Re: WebM support on 4chan
#40OP's link is 404ing and moot's won't connect at all for me. There's no way HN took down 4chan. Anyone have additional info/a mirror?
HN mods should probably update the submission URL to this one: http://blog.4chan.org/post/81896300203/webm-support-on-4chan And you need to disable HTTPS Everywhere for blog.4chan.org since Tumblr doesn't support HTTPS :(
That link doesn't work either: Firefox can't establish a connection to the server at blog.4chan.org.
Edit: I just noticed moot's comment about disabling HTTPS Everywhere. The XML has an exclusion for "status" but not "blog". I'll send a pull request.