Websites can now manipulate individual videoframes, are you excited Any Forums?
developer.mozilla.org
>Many Web APIs use media codecs internally. For example, the Web Audio API, and the WebRTC API. However these APIs do not allow developers to work with individual frames of a video stream and unmuxed chunks of encoded audio or video.
>Web developers have typically used WebAssembly in order to get round this limitation, and to work with media codecs in the browser. However this requires additional bandwidth to download codecs that already exist in the browser, reducing performance and power efficiency, and adding additional development overhead.
>The WebCodecs API provides access to codecs that are already in the browser. It gives access to raw video frames, chunks of audio data, image decoders, audio and video encoders and decoders.
w3.org
Get ready for WebCodecs
At this rate they should make native apps an optional feature for computers. Why waste computing power on something that a majority of people spend less than 1% time on.
is there any point to this other than DRM? But even DRM is covered by widevine or whatever the fuck its called.
> your coding challenge for this interview is to implement a w3c and whatwg compliant web browser.
Don't forget about fingerprinting
Ublockable targeted ads in videos.
If it's done client side, it's blockable. But yeah it will make it a real pain in the ass to do so. inb4 vmprotect releases a wasm obfuscator and makes this insanely hard
you could probably make a kernel that does nothing but launch a w3c-compliant browser and it would be good enough for most normalfags
that's basically what chromeos wants to be
How many standards do you actually have to fulfill for a web browser to be "W3C and WHATWG compliant"? I am actually quite unsure of how many things you have to implement and have work properly.
That's what ChromeOS basically is.
Why do things just get worse and worse all the time?
in best case we can have x265 on the web finally, in worst case every major streaming website will implement their custom video decoding which was a flaw in media extensions because as long as you have the api key you could play it from anywhere, localhost for example. with this you will also have to RE the video decoding
Doesn't the API only give access to the codecs the browser knows about? I don't think this API will enable access to x265 unless it's part of the media codecs that the browser already knows about and even then no responsible developer should use it because it won't work cross-browser (no Firefox support because they will never add proprietary / patented codecs to their browser).
I meant the API key for the widevine current DRM implementation. the website makes an initial request to a license server so as long as you use a browser that has widevine you can play it from anywhere. Firefox supports x264 through OpenH264 even though it's proprietary.
It's already the case that only few companies in the world have enough surplus to maintain their own web browser. This will become even more difficult as they keep adding more and more features to the browser. The whole world economy relies on these browsers being kept alive and updated, in the future even more so. This makes these companies too big to fail like airlines and large banks.
entropy
prisoners dilemma
vicious cycle
take your pick,
all that is necessary is for good men to do nothing; the best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity
i think that by definition the NEET are 'good', and it is by their inaction, their passivity the word wends worse.
It's more complex than any operating system. All of HTML, CSS, JS, plus all the browser APIs exposed via JS. Crypto, device info, canvas, wasm, blobs, EME, geolocation, image capture, payments, performance/timing, service workers, webrtc, webgl, websockets, indexeddb...
I think it would take one person a lifetime or at least their entire career just to implement HTML forms and all of their controls and various HTTP mechanisms.
why do they need this shit?
>in best case we can have x265 on the web finally
AV1 already shipping. forcing retards into some patent bullshit HEVC is a nonstarter.
OpenH.264 is "baseline" profile only for WebRTC. It is basically worthless for actual video content.