Quote from: chocobo on July 31, 2015, 10:30:40 AM

Quote from: barabbas on July 31, 2015, 02:59:25 AM

Quote from: mtomcdev on July 30, 2015, 09:54:22 PM

Quote from: barabbas on July 30, 2015, 08:43:36 PM

Let me put it to you in bold so you GET IT: As far as peer to peer transmission is concerned, there's NO DIFFERENCE, between live video streaming and video on demand. Get that or should I repeat it?
The original video, be it live or previously recorded, still has to be encoded just the same and, if made available -again: IN BOTH INSTANCES-, to different platforms, encoded in several resolutions.

It was explained many times in the last few weeks that in step one, in order to serve Flash clients and to start the service soon as it is possible, the jizzmo and streemo sites would have to use a hybrid model utilizing RTMP nodes. Streaming live is quite different than streaming video on-demand using RTMP servers.

Quote from: barabbas on July 30, 2015, 08:43:36 PM

Dev, I wish you luck.

Thank you! We also wish you find the coin, community and developers which meet your expectations!

OK, since you insist, I will have to repeat the bolded statement: Be it streaming live or streaming recorded (VOD), for the purpose of transmission over the peer to peer network, it is EXACTLY the same thing: Both instances require the video to be encoded for such purpose. The delivery also has the same exact requirements... and pitfalls for both will depend of the strength of stability of the network AND, also, the quality of the peer serving the encoded stream. For instance, if the stream is held, at any given moment, by a device -mobile or otherwise-, whose definition is low, no matter who is receiving that stream or which quality it was delivered previously, that individual would receive the video in the max quality that device provides. Furthermore, if the peer who is serving the stream, disconnects, for whatever reason, voluntary or otherwise, the network will look for another peer to continue the stream... with the consequent interruption of the stream. Not that any of the retards blinded by greed here would even pay any attention to these small details, but for you to finally address the difficulties inherent to the peer to peer video stream model and let the truth come out, that is what, in plain English, is the main -but not the only, y any stretch of imagination- problem in the implementation of the free, peer-to-peer model of video, or live video, streaming. Anyone who has ever downloaded anything on BitTorrent has already experienced exactly those pitfalls as they were at the same time downloading and uploading the data (and video, whether live or recorded, is encoded to be data files), hence why some popular downloads were quite fast while some rarer ones would takes weeks, months or never actually complete.

I believe after this the average "armchair commentator" will have a much better idea of what are the more than potential shortcomings of some of the stuff you are planning on achieving. Once again, good luck with it.

Listen man, I get it, you doubt the effectiveness and even the plausibility of this project. That is fine. 100% fine. At the same time people don't line up and ask barrabas the great arbiter of blockchain, server, and p2p networks if their idea is possible. That's because you don't have the experience or knowledge to make the claims you are making. If you did you would be flaunting it. You are the armchair commentator. Anyone that disagrees with you is retarded and full of greed.

I believe that they are on to something, and chose to invest. Do you have a problem with investments and risks? You do realize that a large majority of tech startups fail right? That doesn't mean they were scams, in fact failure leads to discovery. You think this will fail. I don't. Just because you think that doesn't mean its a scam. Come back when it fails and rub it in our faces. For now either make a well researched point without calling someone a retard, or give us a slight break from your toxic behavior.

I agree completely with the content of your post, except when you introduce the word "scam" which I have not used, not once, regarding this project. And then, partially, when you speak of "well researched" post. But I won't go into details. And, more significantly, when you make reference to my calling someone "retard"... please just read the post of the individual who posted below you and no explanation is needed: If that is not a full retarded individual, no one is. Period. Therefore, dev, it isn't an insult, it's an statement of facts. And I haven't insulted you at all, not once. My reference to "blinded greedy bastards" applies to a number of posters here -three, to be specific-, not necessarily you. The term "blinded greedy bastards" is a crypto variation of what, under less heated circumstances, would be called "ruthless investors". Greed, in itself, "for lack of a better word" is in my opinion -and GG's- good, otherwise. It is rather peculiar that even in view of the gross display of idiocy of that individual, not one of you, not even one, has bothered to let him know how big of a ridicule he was making of himself exposing his lack of understanding not just of the phrase "tongue (firmly) in check", but of the most elemental perception of sarcasm. Nope sir, you were all too worried thinking on how better dismiss any sense of critical thinking, any perception whatsoever that you might be wrong and you may lose your money on this. No way, no how. Better silence in the face of blatant, gross stupidity because, after all, we don't necessarily believe in this stuff, we just need it to be perpetuated long enough to make money off of it at whoever's expense, right? Who cares about rationality, research, statistics even or, on the other hand, intolerable levels of idiocy, IF THEY DONT SERVE/SERVE OUR AGENDAS, right?

Finally, since your statistics are quite correct, any normal person would reasonably be skeptical, just based on numbers, right? And yet, the full retards (PLURAL) here go on rampages of personal insults and blatant lies and mischaracterizations, when obvious, educated and quite reasonable potential bumps are pointed. Even though the dev himself has not engaged in such behavior. Hey, I understand, it's crypto. Retardland of blinded, greedy bastards. But don't expect no retaliation whether you choose to call it toxic behavior or whatever else.

Again, dev, you keep going around and around, but without admitting a very simple, direct, statement of facts: Live video, just like recorded video, for the purpose of distribution and delivery, is exactly the same thing. Finally you admitted to costs and conventional -necessary use-, not just for the legal reasons that I pointed out to you many weeks ago, but because you cannot leave paying customers to the problems in transmission that I pointed out in my previous post. So, exactly how are you going to transmit, for such little costs as you have promised, successful streaming to, say thousands of streamers? If you use RTMP in the hybrid, then we are dealing with an entirely different set of problems, let me quote here some basics by a very knowledgeable expert: "RTMP is quite badly documented protocol and extremely badly implemented.
During my tests I have seen issues like crash of libraries (including the Adobe's original one) if the upper layer commands has been sent in unexpected order (although this is allowed by the RTMP protocol and the order of the upper layer commands is not documented at all). Also I have seen (within Adobe's rtmp library) incorrect implementation of the setPeerBandwidth command." So we are entering in yet another realm of difficulties which would make anyone with even a scentila of common sense, quite skeptical. But, like I said before, I don't want to continue the "discussion", I just wish you luck, you are going to need it.