Comment on Why hasn't video quality improved much over the past ten years?
LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 days agoAlso rights holders dont want you to have an offline copy if they can avoid it, that way its easier to monetize for them.
Well ain’t that a shame. I’ll weep for them I swear.
Not all content can be downloaded,
Like livestreams? That being the exception but most ‘content’ isn’t live.
and for many people they want to watch what they want to watch right now, and waiting for the download is not something they are interested in.
Bet they use YouTube through the home page and use algorithmic feeds and/or corporate social media. Some people are animals and it can’t be helped. That doesn’t mean the rest of us must suffer.
infinitevalence@discuss.online 3 days ago
A shocking amount of content is live, and then encoded for streaming. Given that you are on Lemmy I would guess that your interests dont overlap much with content that requires live transmission. So this is an expected selection bias, not being critical, and totally not judging, just pointing it out so you can be aware. I bet your parents still have cable.
LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 days ago
My parents barely know how to use a computer at all, but they’re old and don’t have internet. They mostly just watch their own DVD movie collections or tune in to movies on DVDs.
I did teach my dad to find news on YT instead of TV (they are Russian, I’d rather they listen to Meduza than Putinist propaganda channels).
I honestly dunno what content requires live transmission apart from livestreams? I didn’t just mean twitch btw I meant sports games etc. None of those require a very high bitrate or quality etc.
infinitevalence@discuss.online 3 days ago
Most news is real-time transmission and over the air TV is still running very high bandwidth. It’s you plug in an HD antenna or ATC.3.0 antenna it will blow away the video quality is Netflix Amazon or YouTube.
LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
Then why does it look like dogshit?