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

FFmpeg merges WebRTC support

git.ffmpeg.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 204 posts

Re: FFmpeg merges WebRTC support

#51

Post by eigenvalue »

msgodel wrote: post #18

That should make self hosting streams/streaming CDNs way easier. If you know how to use it ffmpeg is such an amazing stand alone/plug and play piece of media software.

LLMs really know how to use it incredibly well. You can ask them to do just about any video related task and they can give you an ffmpeg one liner to do it.

Re: FFmpeg merges WebRTC support

#52

Post by minimaxir »

bastawhiz wrote: post #46
minimaxir wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Time is a finite resource, and there's an opportunity cost. If an easy PoC for a complex project can't be created using AI and it would take hours/days to create a PoC organically that may not even be useful, it's better project management to just do something else entirely if it's not part of a critical path.

I can't disagree with this take more vehemently. This isn't an "easy PoC". This is "copy and paste it from the docs"-level effort: https://ffmpegwasm.netlify.app/docs/getting-started/usage/ If you can't be arsed to google the library and read the Usage page and run the _one command_ on the Installation page to come up with a working example (or: tweak the single line of the sample code in the live editor in the docs…

I was commenting on the general assertion of the GP's comment, not this specific instance.

Re: FFmpeg merges WebRTC support

#56

Post by ethersteeds »

baggy_trough wrote: post #45
xxpor wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if you're worried about arbitrary code exec from an ffmpeg vuln, docker is not a sufficient security boundary.

What is?

Full virtualization. Docker implies a shared kernel attack surface, that's what you want to avoid.

Re: FFmpeg merges WebRTC support

#58

Post by dylan604 »

autoexec wrote: post #11

Hopefully this doesn't make it more dangerous to keep ffmpeg on our systems. WebRTC security flaws are responsible for a lot of compromises. It's one of the first things I disable after installing a browser

is this something that one could compile with a --without-whip type of argument if you don't want/need? that would an ideal thing.

Re: FFmpeg merges WebRTC support

#59

Post by Matheus28 »

MrThoughtful wrote: post #49
bastawhiz wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't disagree with this take more vehemently. This isn't an "easy PoC". This is "copy and paste it from the docs"-level effort: https://ffmpegwasm.netlify.app/docs/getting-started/usage/ If you can't be arsed to google the library and read the Usage page and run the _one command_ on the Installation page to come up with a working example (or: tweak the single line of the sample code in the live editor in the docs…

If there is a "copy and paste" way to get that to run in the browser, can you copy and paste it to a jsfiddle and post the link to the fiddle here?

You’re basically asking people to do your homework for you at this point…

Re: FFmpeg merges WebRTC support

#60

Post by rietta »

eigenvalue wrote: post #51
msgodel wrote: post #18

That should make self hosting streams/streaming CDNs way easier. If you know how to use it ffmpeg is such an amazing stand alone/plug and play piece of media software.

LLMs really know how to use it incredibly well. You can ask them to do just about any video related task and they can give you an ffmpeg one liner to do it.

Wow, you are not wrong. I just asked Gemini "how can I use ffmpeg to apply a lower third image to a video?" and it gave a very detailed explanation of using an overlay filter. Have not tested its answer yet but on its face it looks legit.
Post reply on HN