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

Dav2d

code.videolan.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 199 posts

Re: Dav2d

#41

Post by esseph »

fishgoesblub wrote: post #37
dcsommer wrote: post #18

We must not continue to develop media codecs in memory unsafe languages. Small, auditable sections can opt-out perhaps, but choosing default-unsafe for this type of software is close to professional negligence.

Of the 3 software AV1 encoders, the only one that is fully dead is the Rust encoder (rav1e). If people truly wanted memory safe encoders/decoders, they would fund and develop them.

> If people truly wanted memory safe encoders/decoders

Really? How many codecs have your neighbors contributed money for the development of, just curious.

Re: Dav2d

#42

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

Almondsetat wrote: post #17
DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And who ever heard of this in the majority of the world? It was news to me, I'm white and European btw. It's a recurring headline on the rolling news channels on broadcast TV right now - and it's on the front-page of Reddit for me as well.

So a project should change its name because when it will be production ready 6 years from now the 1% of the 1% of the 1% will think for 1 microsecond about a piece of news from today?

> So a project should change its nam

Potentially... supposing the criminal investigation into this uncovers a hitherto unknown organ harvesting scheme operating within the global music records industry; the subsequent police dragnet implicates significant proportion of the world's music stars and record labels and generates continual major headlines and criminal convictions - with all their lurid details - all for multiple decades from now on.

It's quite ridiculous when I put it that way, but this is basically the same thing as Epstein's network, just with a different crime; and Epstein was already in the news almost 20 years ago from his first conviction.

...so back in 2009, back when everyone was building their own social-network websites and online dating services, and supposing your real-name was also Epstein, so you called it "EpsteinLoveIsland.com" - would you have changed the name back then?

Re: Dav2d

#43

Post by multjoy »

amusingimpala75 wrote: post #24
honktime wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its pretty explicitly not a tragedy of the commons. Its a tragedy of the ruling class abusing the resources of the 'commons' to extract value. There is nothing 'commons' about trillion dollar companies extracting all available value from the labor of the working class. That's just the tragedy that'll bring around the death of society, the same tragedy that brings all other tragedys

Thank you for describing the tragedy of the commons

The commons were never unregulated. This is a tragedy of enclosure.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enclosure

Re: Dav2d

#45

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

Lerc wrote: post #21
Almondsetat wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So a project should change its name because when it will be production ready 6 years from now the 1% of the 1% of the 1% will think for 1 microsecond about a piece of news from today?

Just that remember that there were people that said calling the second LOTR movie The Two Towers was disrespectful.

Hollywood retitles movies based on books all the time[1], for the silliest of reasons ("Sorcerer's Stone" was contemporaneous to LOTR too); so given there's precedent, it follows that those wanting to retain the original title from the books should defend their position.

[1] https://www.empireonline.com/movies/features/book-movie-titl...

Re: Dav2d

#46

Post by Telaneo »

esseph wrote: post #41
fishgoesblub wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of the 3 software AV1 encoders, the only one that is fully dead is the Rust encoder (rav1e). If people truly wanted memory safe encoders/decoders, they would fund and develop them.

> If people truly wanted memory safe encoders/decoders Really? How many codecs have your neighbors contributed money for the development of, just curious.

Given Netflix's involvement with SV1-AV1, (not even that) indirectly, at least 1.

Re: Dav2d

#48

Post by asveikau »

walrus01 wrote: post #26
delfinom wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

looks at if AV2 is dead in the water https://www.sisvel.com/insights/av2-is-coming-sisvel-is-prep... yep

Sisvel is a patent troll. Take a look at the combined list of all companies that are the AOM and tell me with a straight face that all of their corporate in house counsel specializing in intellectual property law are wrong.

I don't know this stuff super well but I imagine it's not necessarily about the lawyers being right or wrong so much as what they can convince people of. The ideal scenario for the patent troll is they can intimidate you into licensing with them. Another good outcome for them (though more costly) is they can convince some non-expert in court. In either case the big players behind the codec can defend themselves but a small one just picking it up downstream as OSS can't.

Re: Dav2d

#49

Post by ronsor »

delfinom wrote: post #25
jzebedee wrote: post #2

Project description: dav2d is the fastest AV2 decoder on all platforms :) Targeted to be small, portable and very fast. If you're out of the loop like me: AV2 is the next-generation video coding specification from the Alliance for Open Media (AOMedia). Building on the foundation of AV1, AV2 is engineered to provide superior compression efficiency, enabling high-quality video delivery at significantly lower bitrates.…

looks at if AV2 is dead in the water https://www.sisvel.com/insights/av2-is-coming-sisvel-is-prep... yep

This is a thinly veiled extortion racket and any competent system would fine them into bankruptcy.

Re: Dav2d

#50

Post by walrus01 »

asveikau wrote: post #48
walrus01 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sisvel is a patent troll. Take a look at the combined list of all companies that are the AOM and tell me with a straight face that all of their corporate in house counsel specializing in intellectual property law are wrong.

I don't know this stuff super well but I imagine it's not necessarily about the lawyers being right or wrong so much as what they can convince people of. The ideal scenario for the patent troll is they can intimidate you into licensing with them. Another good outcome for them (though more costly) is they can convince some non-expert in court. In either case the big players behind the codec can defend themselves but a…

I don't doubt for a minute that they are going to attempt to intimidate companies using av1 which are much smaller than the AOM founders.
Post reply on HN