4 ms·

I bet it’s to reduce server load. If a user only sticks around for one or two sections then if everything was downloaded up front the later sections would be wa

I bet it’s to reduce server load. If a user only sticks around for one or two sections then if everything was downloaded up front the later sections would be wasted bandwidth

tomc1985 6y ago
It's to keep control. Plenty of services have offered full downloads over the years and bandwidth is cheap. There's no reason for them not to offer them unless they're being greedy.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- ahepp 6y ago
  It seems kinda weird to me to portray them as greedy. Even if the root of this decision is because they want money, don't they need to fund the content somehow? Khan Academy seems to have really raised the bar for this kind of content. I'm inclined to trust their decision on how to maintain quality and balance that with accessibility. Maybe I'm just naive? At the same time, it does seem like having the content easily available offline could help people out. I wonder if they've ever explained their rationale?
  - tomc1985 6y ago
    Because my statement isn't necessarily about Khan Academy, but anyone hosting cloud-based video content. Data wants to be free, as they say, and digital economies are a world of abundance where copying is free or nearly so. When a provider doesn't align with that they are imposing physical-world scarcity economics in a place where it doesn't belong. It feels like people are trying to erase fundamental concepts like files or downloading, and instead offering a bullshit rental model where anything you can do on the net is at the pleasure of the content owner. It is disempowering to users as it changes them from masters of their domain to digital peons in CC's feudalistic kingdoms. That is what I mean by 'greedy'. If you publish something online, it is out there for good. You cannot try to delete it and you cannot try to control it. You do not have a right to try to profit on the content itself because, again, data is free and no matter how much one might want to control data, ultimately they can't. DRM, ads, subscription gates -- these are all additional layers of crap that we have built to cage that data and prevent it from being freed. It is a shame that we as a people cannot handle this world of abundance, and that the tools we use to navigate it grant us less and less control with every new DRM scheme or subscription service. There are plenty of ways to monetize without locking down bits.
    - Wowfunhappy 6y ago
      > It feels like people are trying to erase fundamental concepts like files or downloading, and instead offering a bullshit rental model where anything you can do on the net is at the pleasure of the content owner. It is disempowering to users as it changes them from masters of their domain to digital peons in CC's feudalistic kingdoms. This is why I find it so disheartening that Khan Academy doesn't allow downloads natively. I understand the incentives for a provider like Youtube are overwhelmingly in favor of streaming-only, but an educational nonprofit like Khan Academy? If even they don't offer downloads, what hope is there?
Wowfunhappy 6y ago
Could put up a torrent. I'd certainly seed that.
dangoor 6y ago
Khan Academy videos are Creative Commons licensed, and Kolibri provides a way to download the videos wholesale. Our focus is on the whole learning experience (which includes exercises and articles, plus keeping track of skills that a student has mastered). We also put a lot of work into providing tools for teachers and coaches to help students. Videos are one part of our work.

I bet it’s to reduce server load. If a user only sticks around for one or two sections then if everything was downloaded up front the later sections would be wasted bandwidth

tomc1985 6y ago

It's to keep control. Plenty of services have offered full downloads over the years and bandwidth is cheap. There's no reason for them not to offer them unless they're being greedy.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
ahepp 6y ago
It seems kinda weird to me to portray them as greedy. Even if the root of this decision is because they want money, don't they need to fund the content somehow? Khan Academy seems to have really raised the bar for this kind of content. I'm inclined to trust their decision on how to maintain quality and balance that with accessibility. Maybe I'm just naive? At the same time, it does seem like having the content easily available offline could help people out. I wonder if they've ever explained their rationale?
- tomc1985 6y ago
  Because my statement isn't necessarily about Khan Academy, but anyone hosting cloud-based video content. Data wants to be free, as they say, and digital economies are a world of abundance where copying is free or nearly so. When a provider doesn't align with that they are imposing physical-world scarcity economics in a place where it doesn't belong. It feels like people are trying to erase fundamental concepts like files or downloading, and instead offering a bullshit rental model where anything you can do on the net is at the pleasure of the content owner. It is disempowering to users as it changes them from masters of their domain to digital peons in CC's feudalistic kingdoms. That is what I mean by 'greedy'. If you publish something online, it is out there for good. You cannot try to delete it and you cannot try to control it. You do not have a right to try to profit on the content itself because, again, data is free and no matter how much one might want to control data, ultimately they can't. DRM, ads, subscription gates -- these are all additional layers of crap that we have built to cage that data and prevent it from being freed. It is a shame that we as a people cannot handle this world of abundance, and that the tools we use to navigate it grant us less and less control with every new DRM scheme or subscription service. There are plenty of ways to monetize without locking down bits.
  - Wowfunhappy 6y ago
    > It feels like people are trying to erase fundamental concepts like files or downloading, and instead offering a bullshit rental model where anything you can do on the net is at the pleasure of the content owner. It is disempowering to users as it changes them from masters of their domain to digital peons in CC's feudalistic kingdoms. This is why I find it so disheartening that Khan Academy doesn't allow downloads natively. I understand the incentives for a provider like Youtube are overwhelmingly in favor of streaming-only, but an educational nonprofit like Khan Academy? If even they don't offer downloads, what hope is there?

Wowfunhappy 6y ago

Could put up a torrent. I'd certainly seed that.

dangoor 6y ago

Khan Academy videos are Creative Commons licensed, and Kolibri provides a way to download the videos wholesale. Our focus is on the whole learning experience (which includes exercises and articles, plus keeping track of skills that a student has mastered). We also put a lot of work into providing tools for teachers and coaches to help students. Videos are one part of our work.