• Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    So why is it rejected?

    Just because they’re still trying to use HDMI to prevent piracy? Who in fuck’s name is using HDMI capture for piracy? On a 24fps movie, that’s 237MB of data to process every second just for the video. A 2 hour movie would be 1.6TB. Plus the audio would likely be over 2TB.

    I’ve got a Jellyfin server packed with 4K Blu-ray rips that suggest there are easier ways to get at that data.

    • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      44
      ·
      8 months ago

      The CEO’s of the media companies are all fucking dinosaurs who still think VCRs should have been made illegal. You will never convince them that built in copy protection is a dumb idea and a waste of time.

    • sarmale@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      8 months ago

      Can’t you compress what the HDMI outputs in real time so that it would have a normal size?

      • Blackmist@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        8 months ago

        Sure. But why bother when you can rip it right from the disc in higher quality than you could ever hope to capture in real time?

    • Kairos@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      8 months ago

      HDMI Splitter + capture card.

      No video put on a streaming service produced in the next 40 years will need HDMI 2.1 to display.

    • CCF_100@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      8 months ago

      Even despite that HDMI capture is simply an awful way of obtaining that data, it’s even more pathetic when that “protection” can be defeated by a $30 capture card on Amazon…

    • lengau@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      The profiles HDMI 2.1 enables are even worse - 4k@120fps type stuff. Not exactly something needed for a movie.

    • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Most people don’t pirate 4K media due to file size and internet speed constraints. Most people pirate 1080p video. There’s also the prospect of people pirating live television, which HDMI capture would be perfect for.

      • Psythik@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Then most people need get a better ISP. My crappy $60/mo fixed 5G can download an entire 4K film in under 10 minutes or start streaming it within a second. Y’all should see if there are any options beyond cable and DSL in your town. You might be pleasantly surprised what’s available these days.

        • nymwit@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Is that not a compressed stream though? Genuinely asking. A 4k blu ray rip and a 4k stream from a service (or whatever it saves for offline viewing on an app) a pretty different. I think things are getting conflated with capturing live 4k television and capturing a 4k blu ray as it plays, which both might be using an HDMI cable.

          • Psythik@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            I use Stremio and only stream full 4K Blu Ray rips, with HDR and Dolby Atmos and all. So nothing is recompressed. 50-70GB files but it starts streaming almost instantly.

            I have a poor 5G signal due to a tree that’s blocking my view of the antenna, so I get anywhere between 400Mbps and 1400Mbps (I’m supposed to get a gigabit but it’s usually closer to 500). Even with a poor signal it’s still way faster than any other ISP in my town.

      • JackbyDev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        The raw images are that big, but they’re compressed (even losslessly) to a fraction of the size.

        • turmacar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          Recently become a fan of kickasstorrents, they usually have a x265 version with a bunch of blu-ray extras and Prowlarr already knows who they are.

        • Scrollone@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Is therarbg safe? The original rarbg closed one or two years ago.

          Also, don’t forget torrent private trackers. They’re harder to get in (signups are usually closed, or you need an invite from someone who’s already in), but they’re very good!

          Lots of hight quality content, well organized, usually with many seeds.

          Of course you need to follow their rules and seed enough.

          Usenet is also a surprisingly good way to find content, but you’ll need to pay both an indexer and a server.

    • PeterPoopshit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      You can pirate media that uses that new blu ray drm by plugging a capture card into the overpriced compatible DVD player and recording the video. Also, it’s a way to transfer saved content from a dvr as their hard drives are always encrypted (do those still exist). The video stream on all this stuff is encrypted with hdcp to prevent this but there exist hdcp strippers. It seems to still be possible to buy them even on Amazon. Stock up before they get banned. Frankly I’m surprised they aren’t banned already.