this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)

Antique Memes Roadshow

5940 readers
1 users here now

Giving you the backstory and appraisals of vintage memes!

Submissions should be vintage memes or commentary about vintage memes. Commenters are advised to appraise the internet value and provenance meme antiquities.

Rules:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Why did this change? Was it a greed thing?

top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago

If you think that was bad, you never tried to download porn on a BBS with a 2400 baud modem.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

YouTube still buffers video?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

What he means is that, in olden days, videos would just keep buffering until the whole video was loaded. Now it's only at most the next ~1min, no more. You were able to see the grey bar thingie go all the way to the end.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

i think its cus a 4k 60hz video would brick anyones ram

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It would buffer to a temp folder. Storing it all in RAM would be pointless.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Some people's internet and hard drives would be crippled by this. It's to promote multitasking mostly. There are ways to download videos that I won't get into, but it is possible if you desperately want to buffer the whole video. I do think it's stupid to lock offline video downlaods behind a subscription paywall, but I am small fry and will do what I can.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago

Not at all. If your hard drive would get crippled by a few GBs then I don't know what to tell you. When the playback is stopped, and the application closed, then the temporary files are discarded.

The argument about bandwidth usage is accurate though. I didn't make sense to buffer the whole video when it might not be watched anyways.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago

For longer videos, a lot of people will stop watching before the video ends. A lot of bandwidth is wasted by buffering the entire video when the user is only going to watch 50% of it. To save bandwidth, sites like YouTube only buffer a tiny bit at a time.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

HTML5 made video a first class citizen of your browser and buffering is handled automatically now 🙂

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Guide/Audio_and_video_delivery/buffering_seeking_time_ranges

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Oh! I just assumed they were trying to save $ on all those looong "___ 10 hr version" videos or something.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago

It's both. Buffering the whole video was a waste of bandwidth and the changes for HTML5 means they could get away with lowering the buffering limit without destroying everyone's viewing experience.