• 1 Post
  • 294 Comments
Joined 4 years ago
cake
Cake day: January 21st, 2021

help-circle

  • I’m pretty surprised that all of the audio formats work. I’m not so surprised that the TV has h265, although maybe a bit surprised that it is exposed to the browser. The container support is also pretty surprising. Unless your MKVs are so simple that they are effectively WEBM.

    Or maybe it pops the link out of the browser into a dedicated media player which has decent codec support.

    iDevices do expose h265 in the browser, but the container support is still a bit surprising. But then again WEBM is basically MKV, so maybe that is why it tends to work.


  • In China there is no such thing as a throwaway number (at least outside of black markets). All numbers require ID to acquire.

    For the US it would be a bit different. VOIP numbers do exist but they are often also blocked by services (this isn’t black and white but there are services that will quite accurately map numbers into ranges like home/cell/business/VoIP).

    But of course the assumption would be that if they start requiring phone numbers for WiFi access the logical next step would be to make all numbers traceable to humans.


  • There are a handful of common reasons.

    1. The client doesn’t support the formats. Browser clients are notoriously picky not supporting some common video (for example few browsers support h265 and it isn’t generally considered web-safe) and audio formats. But embedded devices may also cause trouble if they don’t have enough CPU to do non-accelerated playback and don’t have hardware support for the codec used.
    2. Playing at a lower bitrate. In that case you can transcode at the fly.
    3. Remuxing. This is things like the moov atom where the actual codecs are supported but not the container or exact packaging of the file.

    But yeah, especially if you are using a player with wide format support you may not need it.




  • IMHO this isn’t really worth it.

    1. x264 is very fast at lower profiles. Especially if you aren’t streaming across the internet often the size hit from the fast profiles is fine. Even if you are streaming over the internet it is probably fine. Getting a slightly faster CPU will also get you super far and is more useful to have lying around than a GPU as it will benefit most things that you do on the server. And worst-worst case a bit of CPU usage isn’t going to hurt much of the things that he is running (except maybe a game server if people are playing at the same time and you are really maxing out all of your cores).
    2. Integrated GPUs are fine for a handful of concurrent streams. Especially the Intel ones which have amazing media engines.
    3. Even if you are going for a dedicated GPU I would go with an Intel ARC. They are way better at media encoding and cost less.
    4. You can always add a GPU later. Wait until you have a need and are seeing problems without.



  • I’m struggling to see how this actually made money. Because presumably the customer is paying for the delivery (as well as the food that was never ordered). So the fraudsters would just be paying themselves in a complicated way. My best guess is one of the following:

    1. DoorDash is subsidizing orders so much that this is profitable overall (the amount they pay the driver is more than the customer pays) seems unlikely.
    2. DoorDash is paying the driver multiple times but only charging the customer once. But if this was the case how was this obvious accounting issue never noticed? Shouldn’t the books come out even in the end?


  • kevincox@lemmy.mltoTechnology@lemmy.world*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    4 months ago

    Just looking at the numbers, they are spending $5G and losing $1G. Their subscriptions are growing. So if they grow another 25% they are making money. (Ignoring infrastructure costs which are most likely a tiny fraction of per-user revenue.) They also just launched an Android app. So I think their story is looking pretty good. Not even considering that it raises the value of Apple TV hardware, their other devices and gives them more lock-in for customers in general that seems like a great investment they made.




  • kevincox@lemmy.mlMtoOpen Source@lemmy.mlGIMP 3.0 Released
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    Actually I would pick GIMP.

    1. Says what it is, an image editor.
    2. No popups and random interruptions.
    3. Not only AI editing examples which makes me thing the tool is AI only.
    4. An overview of the variety of major features it has rather than just AI editing.
    5. Links to helpful documentation rather than endless marketing pages that say nothing.

    Really think only thing I would like to see is some screenshots and examples of using the tool, rather than just info on what it does. But the Photoshop page barely has this, just a few examples of the AI tools.


  • I still recommend it. I’m not fully happy with the situation but for now I consider it my best option.

    1. I consider Chromium-based browsers out of the question as they give too much power to Google. This is already showing to be a problem with new APIs and “features” that Google is pushing into the web platform and the bigger the market share gets the more control they have.
    2. Web browsers are the biggest attack surface that most people have. Displaying untrusted webpages and running untrusted code is incredibly difficult and vulnerabilities are regularly discovered. I don’t yet know a Firefox fork that I trust enough to reliably respond to security vulnerabilities quickly and correctly.

    So for now I am staying with raw Firefox. Not to mention that as a disto-built Firefox I have some insulation from Mozilla’s ToS. But I am very much considering some of the forks, especially the ones that are very light with patches and are mostly configuration tweaks.




  • It’s definitely an option. It will do the things that you want (as long as your phone is online, but that is the same for any other solution).

    sending Signal messages with it would be less secure

    Yes, this is because Beeper converts the Signal protocol to the Matrix protocol and vice versa. In order to do this it needs to access the messages. So it needs to decrypt the messages, then re-encrypt them on the other side. This means that the bridge (in this case operated by Beeper) has access to your messages. This is often referred to as “end-to-bridge” encryption, as it isn’t end-to-end anymore.

    This is going to be true of any bridge you use that is hosted by a third party. You are always adding one additional trusted party into your communication.

    the recommended bridge instructions sends me over to Beeper, since I don’t have my own server

    Yes, to practically operate a bridge you need your own Matrix server. This is because the bridge will create a new Matrix user for every remote participant (every phone number you communicate with in this case). Doing this with regular mechanisms would be difficult (as signup is likely restricted in some ways) and inefficient (as each account would need to be checked for new messages separately). Beeper runs their own homeserver so that they can operate their bridges. However Beeper’s bridges are only available to users on the same homeserver (this is not a protocol limitation, just their choice). So in order to use their bridges you need to make an account with them (which you can, it is free IIUC). Beeper also offers custom clients which have special features for interacting with their bridges (for example making it easier to start a conversation with a new phone number).

    The alternative would be to run your own server and bridge (or hire someone to it on your behalf).