Slashdot Mirror


Video Is Coming To Reddit (variety.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report from Variety: Videos are coming to Reddit, thanks to a new feature that allows users to upload video clips directly to the service. Reddit rolled out the new video feature Tuesday after testing it with around 200 communities over the past couple of weeks. Reddit users are now able to upload videos of up to 15 minutes in length, with file sizes being limited to 1 gigabyte. Users will be able to upload videos via Reddit's website and its mobile apps for iOS and Android, with the latter offering basic trimming functionality as well. And, in keeping with the spirit of the site, Reddit is also offering a conversion tool to turn videos into animated Gifs. Videos are being displayed persistently, or pinned, meaning that users can scroll through the comments while the video keeps playing in the corner of their screen. And community moderators can opt not to allow videos in their Subreddits at all, with Le arguing that some discussion-heavy Subreddits may decide that the format just doesn't work for them.

34 of 74 comments (clear)

  1. At last by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Wow, and they got there before unicode at Slashdot.

    1. Re:At last by courteaudotbiz · · Score: 2

      They should change their name to "Seenit"

    2. Re:At last by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      I've heard that Unicode at Slashdot is scheduled one week after the release of Half-Life 3.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
  2. Porn by Nidi62 · · Score: 2, Funny

    See subject

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  3. Good. by thadtheman · · Score: 1

    Ever since Damore, I've been concerned about videos like CppCon and BoostCon along with "XXXX" meetups being posted on Youtube. It's nice to have an alternative.

    1. Re: Good. by thadtheman · · Score: 1

      It increases competition. It means that I don't have less reason to be stuck on youtube. It means that other forms of competition have less barrier to entry ( ie LBRY ).

    2. Re: Good. by ArchieBunker · · Score: 2

      The place is pretty much an echo chamber.

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    3. Re:Good. by zidium · · Score: 1

      Obvious sarcasm is obvious!!! Sheesh!!

      --
      Slashdot Valentines Beta Massacre: iT WORKED! The boycotts killed Beta!!
  4. rickroll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Let the rick-rolling begin!

  5. Re:How about fixing the abusive moderation? by CaptainDork · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Unless Reddit is the gubmint, "free speech" is out of context.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  6. What a laugh by Khyber · · Score: 1

    You thought your energy, storage, and bandwidth bills were high before... and you're still not really making any money, and thought this was a good idea?

    Try firing your corrupt administration, first. You might have enough money to BEGIN to afford the drain you just put on yourself.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  7. Great experiment by s.petry · · Score: 1

    I'm sure it's going to work out as well as the optimists think! What could possibly go wrong?

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  8. Re:How about fixing the abusive moderation? by epyT-R · · Score: 1

    upholding free speech is the responsibility of a free society, not its government. Typically, it's cultures unwilling to deal with uncomfortable truths that seek to silence others, hence the similarities between the left and these neo nazi groups..

  9. Re:How about fixing the abusive moderation? by Mashiki · · Score: 1

    Unless Reddit is the gubmint, "free speech" is out of context.

    You have posted this comment in /r/pcmasterrace, you have been automatically banned from /r/politics /r/worldnews /r/twoxchromosomes /r/offmychest /r/rape, 11/25 default subs, etc.

    Please enjoy your stay on reddit, where echo chambers reign supreme.

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
  10. Re: How about fixing the abusive moderation? by KGIII · · Score: 1

    Free speech should be a social objective, not just a matter of law. No, it needn't be absolute, but it should be the default.

    I have no opinion on reddit. I just have an opinion on freedom of expression.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  11. Re:How about fixing the abusive moderation? by ClickOnThis · · Score: 5, Informative

    Lefties and proggies don't believe in free speech or liberalism.

    Okay, put down the broad brush, and rethink your view of the world.

    People, no matter what part of the political spectrum they identify with, are not so easy to pigeon-hole as you want to imagine.

    And BTW, there are plenty of lefties and righties who believe in free speech and liberalism (in the sense of liberty.)

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  12. Why would you turn h264 etc. into gif? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Every single browser can play the modern formats in a thin frame, why would you ever need to use gif? It's a brilliant way to take high-quality video and turn it into something bulky, sluggish, in low fidelity. Are you stupid or something?

    1. Re:Why would you turn h264 etc. into gif? by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      Because some of us prefer 256 color video. Check your privilege.

  13. Re:Wait until the SJWs undo it all by eclectro · · Score: 1

    The content you are referring to is truly dangerous.

    And that is for me to decide. Not a bunch of SJWs (who thinks the "ok" hand symbol is somehow white power) to protect the perpetually offended.

    The fact that you think you know what I have been watching and say with a straight face that it is "truly dangerous" shows just how full of horseshit that you and your ilk are.

    --
    Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
  14. Re:Wait until the SJWs undo it all by schleimkeim · · Score: 1

    How soon before we see a "purge" like what his happening now at Youtube with all conservative content?

    > conservative content You are so full of shit. God dammit, I swear internet comments get dumber every day.

  15. So The Shills and Bots Can Watch Them? by Kneo24 · · Score: 1

    Because let's face it, enough of their traffic is exactly that to keep driving narratives so things constantly hit the front page that probably wouldn't organically get there in the first place.

  16. Re:How about fixing the abusive moderation? by Whibla · · Score: 1

    Indeed.

    I do find it both troubling and amusing that while you were modded down for saying that the GP was modded up.

    Let's try to lay this out so even the biggest "words can hurt me" snowflakes can understand it:

    Ok, so "congress shall make no law ... prohibiting the free exercise ... or abridging the freedom of speech". We get that. But where does that freedom of speech come from in the first place?

    I'll tell you, it's a natural, inalienable right of every person! Natural in that it applies to everyone, inalienable in that it can't be given away, and it can't be taken away. Not businesses, not individuals, not churches, cults, charitable organisations, no-one! Just because the founding fathers felt the need to explicitly state that the state couldn't restrict that right doesn't mean that anyone else can. They can't, and attempting to restrict someone's right to free speech is wrong*!

    Honestly, some of the sheer idiocy I see here just boggles my mind!

    *This is not to say you are free from any consequences resulting from what you've said - I realise that this is a common argument / misconception regarding free speech.

  17. Does this mean they have to change their name? by sabbede · · Score: 1

    Watchdit?

  18. Video Is Coming To Reddit by RahulEkbote · · Score: 1

    Well that's a great news, now no more using youtube videos on reddit...

  19. Re:How about fixing the abusive moderation? by Whibla · · Score: 1

    Let's try to lay this out so even the biggest "words can hurt me" snowflakes can understand it:

    I don't like replying to myself, but, on reflection, I regret this choice of words.

    While I tend to think that, for the most part, offence is taken not given, I am sorry if anyone was offended by this part of what I said.

    I stand by the rest of the post though.

  20. Re:Wait until the SJWs undo it all by Vrekais · · Score: 1

    But the issues at Youtube are that advertisers are pressuring them to only show their ad on content that doesn't go against the companies guidelines. Film companies don't want their films advertised before a video preaching racial hatred. Seeing as YouTube, Google and the people making the videos rely on ad revenue to fund themselves, the site being perceived a non-advertiser friendly could and has cost them significantly. Even channels that provide news coverage of the recent marches and terrorist attacks have been flagged by advertisers, not even content in support of those things, just journalism.

    So they're stuck between building better systems to indentify content the advertisers don't want to be associated with and either removing or filtering it, or loosing the larger advertisers entirely and potentially leading YouTube into financial decline.

    How is that in any way Google being evil?

  21. Anti-Flash turned out to be bad by squiggleslash · · Score: 2

    So, now we've migrated from Flash (boo!) to HTML5 multimedia...

    - Every site wants to include video, no matter how inappropriate
    - Every site wants the video to autoplay
    - Every site wants it to be as intrusive and distracting as possible, impossible to scroll past and ignore

    I've been worrying for a while we made a mistake in demonizing Flash. You see, Flash you could just disable. Because it was a security risk, there were a hundred browser extensions and features making it easy to block Flash on a case-by-case basis.

    But video? Mozilla won't even provide a UI to allow you to disable autoplay, and if you do disable it via about:config, it's an all-sites-or-nothing thing. I've actually switched to using Firefox to browse the web, and Chrome to view videos if I find one I want to watch.

    This is horrible. Do I want Flash back? The worst part of that question is: I don't know. I really don't know. Between the abuse of video, and the introduction of non-standards for DRM by the W3C effectively closing the web, I think Flash was better.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    1. Re:Anti-Flash turned out to be bad by hackel · · Score: 1

      None of your arguments have anything to do with the medium. Whether Flash or HTML5 video, browsers could implement identical controls. Flash is garbage for *technical* reasons. I'm sure there are already extensions out there to handle disabling autoplay on a site-by-site basis, exactly like we had for Flash. Personally, I *always* set Flash to click-to-play site-wide, and so doing the same for HTML5 video makes perfect sense. This is really a non-issue. The benefits of HTML5 video completely trump this minor issue.

    2. Re:Anti-Flash turned out to be bad by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Whether Flash or HTML5 video, browsers could implement identical controls

      But they don't. They don't feel the need to. That's the point. I even made it above.

      They refuse to on two grounds: that there's no compelling security reason to, and that it would break the web standards they signed up to. The standards applying to how you included a plug-in were always somewhat vague and Mozilla et al were able to comfortably implement click to play.

      Why don't they do it for video? Because they can't without breaking the standards. Because there are websites like Youtube that break if you disable autoplaying video.

      So they don't. So we're in a worse situation than we were before. You can say "Oh, but that shouldn't be the case, there's no technic..." let me stop you there, the REALITY, the actual situation we're in, is that browsers do not let users control when videos load and start, because HTML5 video turns out to be a worse standard than Flash.

      It didn't have to be.

      But it ended up being one.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  22. yay by sproketboy · · Score: 1

    More things for reddit to sensor and shadow ban!

  23. Turn videos INTO animated GIFs? Huh? by hackel · · Score: 1

    That is going the wrong direction. Why would anyone want to take a nice video, increase the file size tenfold, and reduce it to 256 colours? That makes no sense.

    I've always hated the recent resurgence of this antiquated, terrible image format, but this is a new low. Fuck you Reddit for continuing to spread this garbage.

  24. Just what we need.... by superdave80 · · Score: 1

    ...more video on the internet. Because there's nothing I like better than sitting through a three-minute video to get 10 seconds of information that I could have read.

  25. Re: How about fixing the abusive moderation? by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    I question your use of the word, "should."

    If you're a legislator pondering the wording of a Constitutional amendment, then fine.

    Freedom of speech is a protection against being arrested by the government.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  26. Re:How about fixing the abusive moderation? by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    I have never been to Reddit; don't know any of the TOS; don't know the etiquette; have no motivation to go there.

    I do, however, know what freedom of speech is.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.