4 ms·

I think needing a super fast Internet connection is like a huge barrier for adoption. Even in India, say they had their backend servers, expecting everyone doin

I think needing a super fast Internet connection is like a huge barrier for adoption. Even in India, say they had their backend servers, expecting everyone doing video to have a 1Gbps connection is not easy. [1] Also, the demo tells me the target audience is not pro video folks (film/TV) rather individuals. They might find it harder to keep spending so much on shuttling data. The power of ML in video has been clear to many but we need these tools to work offline. Are there great ML specific chips for PC/laptops? I mean like the ones that Apple keeps talking about? I am not in the domain so I don't know, but I guess GPUs are the best chips for this, is there any reason this software would not work on a beefy RTX 30X0 based device? Update 1. I mention "even in India" because I keep seeing bandwidth pricing here is still relatively cheap, globally speaking. OK, not cheap by typical Indian household measures but if you are doing pro video then yeah, cheap infrastructure.

sillysaurusx 5y ago
Why would a 1Gbps connection be required for streaming video? Netflix, YouTube, and Twitch seem to be able to service most of the world. I haven’t actually read the article, so perhaps they say as much. But if so, that’s surprising. EDIT: thinking a bit more carefully, the limitation is upload speed, not download speed. In that area, the US has been lagging behind in tech. Still, I wouldn’t bet against it being viable. I remember the first few months YouTube launched. The video quality was atrocious, the worst on the internet by far — this isn’t revisionism; other platforms tried to compete on quality. Didn’t matter; youtube won. And now we enjoy 4K steaming.
- andrepew 5y ago
  From what I hear from my friends who edit video, pro video editing workflows can involve some pretty hefty bitrates beyond what 1gbit networking can handle.
  - sillysaurusx 5y ago
    I'm not sure I understand why that would be true. If all of the assets are on the server, why wouldn't the server send down a compressed view of the video? It can do progressive sharpening too, so that e.g. if you pause the video you can see the full quality. I agree that it's not ideal, but a lot of people would use it if the price was right. I would. As far as the video assets being on the server, sure, it may suck to upload those. But people do (sometimes) upload HQ assets to youtube, so it's not unheard of.
    - yunohn 5y ago
      If it takes multiple hours to upload footage, because upload speeds are generally horrible and not symmetric even on gigabit lines, I can definitely see that being a massive barrier.

sillysaurusx 5y ago

Why would a 1Gbps connection be required for streaming video? Netflix, YouTube, and Twitch seem to be able to service most of the world. I haven’t actually read the article, so perhaps they say as much. But if so, that’s surprising. EDIT: thinking a bit more carefully, the limitation is upload speed, not download speed. In that area, the US has been lagging behind in tech. Still, I wouldn’t bet against it being viable. I remember the first few months YouTube launched. The video quality was atrocious, the worst on the internet by far — this isn’t revisionism; other platforms tried to compete on quality. Didn’t matter; youtube won. And now we enjoy 4K steaming.

andrepew 5y ago
From what I hear from my friends who edit video, pro video editing workflows can involve some pretty hefty bitrates beyond what 1gbit networking can handle.
- sillysaurusx 5y ago
  I'm not sure I understand why that would be true. If all of the assets are on the server, why wouldn't the server send down a compressed view of the video? It can do progressive sharpening too, so that e.g. if you pause the video you can see the full quality. I agree that it's not ideal, but a lot of people would use it if the price was right. I would. As far as the video assets being on the server, sure, it may suck to upload those. But people do (sometimes) upload HQ assets to youtube, so it's not unheard of.
  - yunohn 5y ago
    If it takes multiple hours to upload footage, because upload speeds are generally horrible and not symmetric even on gigabit lines, I can definitely see that being a massive barrier.