this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2024
1533 points (99.1% liked)

Microblog Memes

5910 readers
2617 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 229 points 3 months ago (8 children)

It probably saves insane amounts of bandwidth. But at what cost :(

[–] [email protected] 93 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The cost of shareholder profits.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 3 months ago

wait isnt it the other way around, buffering was costing profits for shareholders so they limited it?

[–] [email protected] 58 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I'm sure they have a legitimate numerical value for it

[–] [email protected] 94 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I dunno, I've been in a few meetings where people with deep pockets make critical infrastructure decisions based on extremely limited information. Trusting "them" to have a valid metric is a rookie mistake.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 3 months ago (2 children)

The older you get you realize more and more that the people making the decisions are totally clueless.
...Until you become one of the decision makers.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 3 months ago

Yep.

At my first job I was in charge of implementing new software (definitely not in my job description - I was basically a secretary). I was discussing security concerns with the head honchos and they interrupted me and dismissed my concerns because they "only hire honest people."

They gave everyone admin permissions.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago

Yuuuuuuup.

"How much will option A cost? Dunno."
"What about option B? Dunno."
"My gut tells me B is much more expensive than A though." "Yeah for sure. But I prefer B."

Wanna waste a hundred grand a year? Go right ahead, who cares. Wanna hire someone? Woah hold your horses there bucko, don't you know we have budget limitations??

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 215 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 68 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I can't believe someone put in pictures what I've been playing out in my mind all along.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 3 months ago

You made the comic.

[–] [email protected] 155 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Letting the entire video buffer is the same as downloading the entire video which you can still do. My favourite tool is yt-dlp

[–] [email protected] 34 points 3 months ago

It's a pretty great tool. Downloaded the entirety of Murder Drones on Saturday to add to my Plex server. Strictly for preservation, going to re-watch on YouTube to support them

[–] [email protected] 22 points 3 months ago (5 children)

You can also setup a script to automatically download a channels latest vid so you don’t need to check the website anymore.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 141 points 3 months ago (1 children)

In case of YouTube you can actually dump the link into VLC, and it will happily buffer the whole video while paused. This probably works with other sites, but I have only tested YouTube.

Alternatively you can of course just download the video with yt-dlp, and then play it locally

[–] [email protected] 29 points 3 months ago (3 children)

And I've just learned of another reason why VLC is fucking great.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 114 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Also clicking on some previous segment and NOT having the video load again. Idle for too long and the video unloads.

[–] [email protected] 62 points 3 months ago (1 children)

And now you get a bonus ad when you skip back too!

[–] [email protected] 34 points 3 months ago (2 children)

That shit infuriates me. I sometimes get distracted, skip back like 30 seconds, and get 30 seconds of unskippable ads. Fuck me.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 93 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (12 children)

I miss the days when my much slower internet connection let me download entire videos faster than streaming to watch them with less buffering and fewer glitches. Now that I have a rock solid gigabit fiber connection with single digit latency, how is watching video such a bad experience?

[–] [email protected] 53 points 3 months ago

Because of all the telemetry and ads loading in the background.

[–] [email protected] 44 points 3 months ago (1 children)

No matter how fast your connection is, a 30s ad takes half a minute to play.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 3 months ago (2 children)

The frustrating thing is that when I do see ads, the ad itself plays in higher resolution, and plays more smoothly than the video I'm trying to watch.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 3 months ago

Different CDN with better allocation of resource and location than the CDN for the content you’re watching.

Makes sense, the ad people are the real customers vs your attention the product.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

If you watched it in 320p like the old days then it might be faster?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Internet providers have more or less been given permission to throttle and be selective all they want, due to the Supreme courts recent rulings. Before that, they at least tried to hide it.

Run your stuff through a good vpn and you might d8scover all of your problems disappear. It sure as heck does on t-mobile.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 53 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It's logical if you're the user.

Imagine how for every one user doing this deliberately there are nine who pause a video and forget it in the background, wasting bandwidth in the process.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (7 children)

Is bandwith that expensive nowadays? I feel the argument is valid but was implemented when bandwidth was way more expensive.

I mean, if I upgrade my home internet box to the 40€ tier I'll have 10Gb symmetrical.

Edit: there are a lot of google fanbois here lol

[–] [email protected] 20 points 3 months ago (3 children)

It’s not about your bandwidth, it’s about YouTube’s bandwidth. You probably don’t care, but for them it adds up to a lot

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 51 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (30 children)

Just download the video then.

Youtube stop doing this because people would pause a Multi-Hour long video (such as a music video) download the entire thing, only to then only watch 15 minutes of it because that's the bit they wanted. Massive waste of bandwidth

[–] [email protected] 20 points 3 months ago (3 children)

If only there were some middle ground between multi-hours and 30 seconds.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago (2 children)

What do you mean “waste of bandwidth”? We’re paying for that through government subsidies and selling our personal data. Are you seriously defending a corporation that made $250 billion last year in ad revenue alone?

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 months ago (2 children)

This is a weird point. Like yes, Google is a government subsidized monopoly. But to keep this feature is a massive waste of resources.

Like from a tech perspective, this should not be done. Like fuck Google can be a thing and will have no impact on that

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (28 replies)
[–] [email protected] 41 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (6 children)

I used to be able to load up a bunch of videos in different tabs. Close the laptop and drive into the bush to watch shit and smoke a joint.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 40 points 3 months ago

I remember when we were still on dial-up and I found a youtube video I wanted to show my brother, I'd let it buffer and load and have to keep the pc on the entire day until he got home from work.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 3 months ago (5 children)

I used to queue videos up the night before, then be able to watch them on the ride to school. Then one day you couldn't do that anymore.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 3 months ago

There use to be a feature in Internet Explorer where you could download a local copy of a webpage and specify how many links deep you wanted it to go. It maxed out at 5, which would grab the entirety of any fansite I pointed it at.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago

It took like an hour for an image of the Ultra 64 (N64) controller to load on my screen from the reveal in Japan. I remember waiting as each line of the image would slowly appear on a grey scale laptop screen over dial up. My eleven year old mind was blown, worth it.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 3 months ago (2 children)

The grey is faster than the red, then I ask to myself, what a wonderful world.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 3 months ago
[–] [email protected] 18 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It sucks for livestreams on youtube too, since it only starts downloading the next chunk of video when it's almost done playing through the current chunk and if you experience a hiccup, then youtube's solution is to send you back in the livestream (amount depends on latency setting of the streamer) so instead of getting a nice live stream, you could be going back as far as around 20 seconds in the past, so if you want to participate then you're going to be that slow on your reaction. Instead of waiting for the full 5 seconds of the buffer to play through before downloading the next chunk, I wish they'd query for the next chunk before then and not only that, but if there's a hiccup, don't send the stream back by so much, because also if you fall too far behind then it skips ahead. It's all over the place.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 months ago (7 children)

Modern ABRs are actually quite sophisticated, and in most cases you're unlikely to notice the forward buffer limit. Unstable connection scenarios are going to be the exception where it breaks down.

For best user experience it's of course good practice to offer media offlining alongside on demand, but some platforms consider it a money-making opportunity to gate this behind a subscription fee.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I thought the connection I was on before was pathetic dog shit (moved rural and went from 1g to 100mbps up/down at both) and the only issues I ever had was specifically peacock because that app is designed to work just poorly enough that I'll struggle with it

Literally haven't thought about video buffering since like... 2014, 2013? Unless of course my Internet drops out. And that includes on mobile devices

I shudder to think what y'all are running on

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›