"It irritates me because it seems such a self-conscious way to live. But, to be fair, it’s almost always completely unselfconsciously done.
It’s people like me, carping at the camcordsters, who are overthinking how life should be experienced. We’re the ones who are trying to impose our opinion of how things should be enjoyed. 'Why can’t you just look at a view!?' we fume, but we never ask ourselves: 'Why can’t you just let people enjoy the view in the way they want!?' Exasperated by people staring at their phones instead of the world around them, we end up staring at people staring at their phones, miss the sunset, fireworks display or penguin feeding time, and don’t even walk away with a video to watch later." (SLGuardian)
posted by joseph conrad is fully awesome
on Sep 14, 2014 -
"Dog owners have a dog park where they can show off their dogs, but cat people don't have that," she says. "The Internet is where people who love cats can go to say, 'Look how cute my cat is.'" On cat videos on the Internet
, and maintaining the popularity of Henrí and Maru
, while designers
of the Scratching Post
note how how some owners start writing in a first feline style. [more inside]
posted by Wordshore
on Oct 24, 2012 -
Suppose I could offer you a choice of two technologies for watching TV online. Behind Door Number One sits a free-to-watch service that uses off-the-shelf technology and that buffers just enough of each show to put the live stream on the Internet. Behind Door Number Two lies a subscription service that requires custom-designed hardware and makes dozens of copies of each show. Which sounds easier to build—and to use? More importantly, which is more likely to be legal?
If you went with Door Number One, then you are a sane person, untainted by the depravity of modern copyright law. But you are also wrong. The company behind Door Number One, iCraveTV, was enjoined out of existence a decade ago. The company behind Door Number Two, Aereo, just survived its first round in court and is still going strong.
Why Johnny can't stream: How video copyright went insane
by MeFi's own James Grimmelmann
posted by Horace Rumpole
on Aug 30, 2012 -
We expect even more rapid innovation in the web media platform in the coming year and are focusing our investments in those technologies that are developed and licensed based on open web principles. To that end, we are changing Chrome’s HTML5 <video> support to make it consistent with the codecs already supported by the open Chromium project. Specifically, we are supporting the WebM (VP8) and Theora video codecs, and will consider adding support for other high-quality open codecs in the future. Though H.264 plays an important role in video, as our goal is to enable open innovation, support for the codec will be removed and our resources directed towards completely open codec technologies.
- Google's Chrome is will be joining Firefox in no longer licensing the MPEG-LA H.264 video codec
favoured by Apple and Microsoft for use in the HTML5 <video> tag (previously
). Not everyone is seeing this as a good thing
posted by Artw
on Jan 13, 2011 -
The <video tag>
, as defined by the HTML5 spec, is an element "used for playing videos or movies". Which codec
those videos or movies are in is currently undefined, with the two contenders being the free open source Ogg Theora
and the proprietary H.264
. With the unveiling of Internet Explorer 9
both Microsoft and Apple are supporting H.264 in their browsers, and comparisons
of the standards seem to bear out H.264 as the better of the two. However Mozilla have taken a stance against incorporating H264 into Firefox on the grounds that it is patented and has to be licensed
. Arguments are now being made for
Mozilla sticking to its ideals. John Gruber
of Daring Fireball points out that Firefox already supports proprietary formats such as GIF. Um, perhaps not the best example
posted by Artw
on Mar 21, 2010 -
The Pleasure of Flinching.
"In the viral video realm, amateur Iraq war footage ranks just behind pornography, celebrities’ drunken exploits, and shark attacks. Do these videos represent what Sontag called our 'right to view,' or are they a porn medium made from leftovers of a world filming its self-destruction?" [Via]
posted by homunculus
on Feb 27, 2010 -
is perhaps the internet's most infamous hack
, digi/net artist
. His work
stands for a growing culture
of artists who run wildly
through animated GIF landscapes populated
with corrupted data-compressed
bunny rabbits and tinny, MIDI renditions
of Savage Garden ballads. As the Lisson Gallery
, London, opens its archives to Arcangel's curatorial eye, could digi/net art
be set to infect
the real, fleshy world
, like a rampant Conficker Worm
? Has YouTube become
the truest reflection of our anthropological
selves? Are we destined to roam the int3erw£bs like the mythic beasts of yore
, hoping, in time
, that digi art can free us
from the confines of this fleshy void?
posted by 0bvious
on Dec 8, 2009 -
People of the Web
--very well done short video profiles of interesting people online. Mike Rogers of blogactive
is on the front page now. Links to previous profiles are on the right, including Kirk Cameron, Caleb Shikles, Sherman Austin, and Josh Wolf.
posted by amberglow
on Jun 1, 2007 -
is an excellent web based utility for downloading web video from many of the most popular sites (iFilm, google video, YouTube & a ton of others) to your hard drive.
posted by jonson
on Mar 12, 2006 -
Grandfather of the personal blog freaks out
at age 30, after spending 11 years writing about the most i
of his life. From the beginning
, he was always brutally honest in a time long before it became so commonplace, before any of us knew where this internet business would take us. Naturally he recorded said freakout on video for the world to see, and more or less shut down
site. Can we take this kind of display at face value? Is it a bad case of someone substituting net life for the real thing? Is it all just effete whining? Or is this a genuine case of two loves colliding, and a man forced to make a difficult choice?
posted by drpynchon
on Feb 7, 2005 -
Want to listen to the World Series on the Web? Pay $9.95
. I know, it's a sports post, so (most) everyone will hate it, but I see a disturbing trend of no more free media lunches on the Web. CNN went subscription
months ago, and most other places I've gone for free video/audio are drying up. All I wanted was to listen to the game. But I can't find it anywhere. All the regular stations I listen to that carry the game are silent. And how will the Angels make a valiant comeback if I can't cheer them on? (sigh)
posted by TheManWhoKnowsMostThings
on Oct 26, 2002 -
Bait and Switch?
(Quicktime Movie) - One of the Mac Faithful at fury.com
makes a funny (but true) statement about the new .Mac
service charge that Apple recently announced. How far can Apple push their core consumer market with this type of thing? In a News.com report
, Apple predicts losing up to 90%
of their existing .Mac users. That's some public relations plan. They are indeed thinking differently.
posted by Argyle
on Jul 26, 2002 -
is tomorrow's technology today -- its "TiVo on steroids,"
according to Joachim Kim,
a creator of a new technology that enables users (which may at sometime include the public on a subscription model) to pull up video-quality or better streaming footage of any television show
that aired or is currently airing, including (or not including) the commercials, all in a handy web application. The limitations are endless
Such a technology could prove deadly for the big TV networks (down the road sometime), although ShadowTV seems optimistic to work with content providers.
[Thanks to Professor Michael Rosenblum at NYU for introducing our Televison and the Information Explosion
class to tomorrow' technology.]
Now, let me begin planning that 7-season Star Trek: Voyager marathon...
posted by nyukid
on Apr 20, 2001 -
Net faces 10-year Olympic shutout.
Chairman of the IOC Internet working group says, "Unless and until you can guarantee your internet signal is only available within your territory, you cannot put video on your website. We're going to go forward with that and we're going to see how it evolves." Anyone have some portable transmission walls they can erect on international boundaries every two years?
posted by netbros
on Dec 5, 2000 -