4 ms·
What you say is plausible but encoding multiple streams on weaker clients would be challenging I think (doesn't it run on tablets and the like?). Also I don't
by simias 6y ago
What you say is plausible but encoding multiple streams on weaker clients would be challenging I think (doesn't it run on tablets and the like?).
Also I don't know if it's a reasonable comparison point but Youtube does transcode server-side into a whole bunch of of different resolutions and video standards, going as high as 8K these days I think. Given the amount of video they receive every single second it's pretty wild how much processing power that must represent.
- andy_ppp 6y agoI suggest the server tells the client which bitrate/compression to send, but watermarks probably don’t need a full re-encode on the server, could easily be in metadata or only key frames which would be fine. Scary though, I’m sure this will happen in all media at some point. The best way to get around this of course is use someone else’s account to leak from...
- meowface 6y agoI imagine the only truly secure way to do it would be to transcribe the meeting (automatically or manually) and leak the transcription. The video/audio could be shared with one or two trusted journalists to prove it's legitimate (barring sophisticated deepfakes), and the journalists could post the transcript. Maybe in theory even a transcription could be unsafe if the server actually manipulated the words in real-time in some way so that different listeners would hear different word synonyms at certain points, but that seems very convoluted and unlikely.
- kevincox 6y agoThis isn't challenging. It is done for a majority of conference software. Essentially the client uploads the streams in such a way that they "depend" on each other. You can imagine there is a base stream at 480p 15fps, then you can add on some packets to get 480 30fps, and further to get 720fps. https://webrtcglossary.com/svc/ https://webrtcglossary.com/svc/