It's just recordings of myself when I'm doing deep work. I use OBS to stream my computer screen and a video recording of myself (mostly me muttering to myself).
It helps me avoid getting distracted (I feel like I'm being watched lol) and it's also interested to check back if I want to see what I was working on 3 months ago.
Compression will limit the bandwidth of a given frame but you can work around it.
Some forms of DRM are already essentially this, compression - and even crappy camera recording from a theater - resistant DRM that is essentially stegonagraphy (you can't visually tell its there) exist.
EDIT: "compression resistant watermark" is a good search phrase if anyone is curious
Unless you tuned the NN on the files you get back from YouTube, so that it learns to encode the data in a way that is always recoverable despite the artifacts.
That is what redundancy and error correcting codes are for. It will reduce your data density, but I am sure you can find parameters that preserve the data.
isn't the point here that the sub-pixels being produced are so large that it would take a tremendous amount of artifacts to reduce them to an unreadable state?
in other words; if YTs compression was affecting it so badly that it prevented the data from being re-read, wouldn't that compression scheme render normal video-watching impossible?
You'd be surprised how much YouTube lets you upload.
I've been uploading 2-3 hours of content a day every day for the past few years. On the same account too.
I have fewer than 10 subscribers lol.
Lucky you. I just posted my first two videos from a conference that were banned within a day for violating "Community Guidelines" without appeal.
They let you sometimes get away with a lot more[0] ;)
[0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Olkb7fYSyiI
How MUCH - yes - as long as it's videos, and it's not violating copyright, you're probably not violating any Terms of Service.
But I guarantee there is some clause in the ToS that this project violates.
What kind of content do you upload? (Should "content" be in air quotes? :P)
Lol yeah.
It's just recordings of myself when I'm doing deep work. I use OBS to stream my computer screen and a video recording of myself (mostly me muttering to myself).
It helps me avoid getting distracted (I feel like I'm being watched lol) and it's also interested to check back if I want to see what I was working on 3 months ago.
All the videos are unlisted or private.
4 replies →
You could make it much harder to detect by synthesizing a unique video with a DNN and hiding the data using traditional stenography techniques.
I think that video compression might make this not a viable technique. Artifacts would destroy the hidden data, right?
Compression will limit the bandwidth of a given frame but you can work around it.
Some forms of DRM are already essentially this, compression - and even crappy camera recording from a theater - resistant DRM that is essentially stegonagraphy (you can't visually tell its there) exist.
EDIT: "compression resistant watermark" is a good search phrase if anyone is curious
Unless you tuned the NN on the files you get back from YouTube, so that it learns to encode the data in a way that is always recoverable despite the artifacts.
Couldn't you also embed data through sound? Upload a video of a monkey at the zoo but you insert ultrasound with encoded data.
something like this but far more mundane
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLNpy62jIFk
2 replies →
That is what redundancy and error correcting codes are for. It will reduce your data density, but I am sure you can find parameters that preserve the data.
Another thread posted today makes it seem like they don't really care
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31488455
Then the whole HN crowd would have enough outrage materials for weeks. Seems like a win-win situation to me.
If it becomes prevalent, I think YouTube would do something like slightly randomize the compression in their videos to dissuade this kind of use.
isn't the point here that the sub-pixels being produced are so large that it would take a tremendous amount of artifacts to reduce them to an unreadable state?
in other words; if YTs compression was affecting it so badly that it prevented the data from being re-read, wouldn't that compression scheme render normal video-watching impossible?