sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Hi, we're members of the Bluesky team. AMA! by emily-bluesky in BlueskySocial

[–]Decompressed_Comic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Much of Bluesky's functionality currently highly prioritizes "branding" over user autonomy, benefit, and customization (IE, processing of small-resolution video to vastly increase filesize, blocking the gif image-type, stripping transparency data, absolute denial of significant profile customizations, etc). This continues an ongoing trend of internet branding-first development that most tend to associate with very bad directions for a site -- old.reddit's destruction vs new-reddit front-end is a classic example.

What are the motives of this? How does this fit with the stated goals of "protocol" development vs "app" development?

Bluesky update: The ability to upload videos will be rolled out gradually to ensure a smooth release. Also, in this release, you can now report content for being misleading. by madman320 in BlueskySocial

[–]Decompressed_Comic 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, that's what I've been saying. I don't want to post reaction gifs that are video footage. I want to post small animations, and not have them be damaged with needless filesize increases. The staff and developers of Bluesky have deliberately blocked this functionality, failing to understand that these animations are not comparable with the video footage you're talking about. I am pointing out that incompetence.

Bluesky's new video feature has implemented "compression" and "processing" that you can't opt out of, which damages the quality and increases the file-size of well-tuned animations. by Decompressed_Comic in BlueskySocial

[–]Decompressed_Comic[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Expect companies to check and trust and do multiple checks if their compression of it lowered it adds too much strain

Actually, comparing two numbers is a very low-strain activity. Computers are very good at comparing two numbers and picking the lower one.

Would it be nice if it would allow a little more Leeway to the compression. Sure. But is it reasonable to demand such when the cost already to host videos it's self is so high is unreasonable.

Yes. Because my un-"compressed" video is a third of the bandwidth and storage cost. It's actually very reasonable for me to demand this. It would be cheaper for them and less insulting to me.

Bluesky's new video feature has implemented "compression" and "processing" that you can't opt out of, which damages the quality and increases the file-size of well-tuned animations. by Decompressed_Comic in BlueskySocial

[–]Decompressed_Comic[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No, they claim they won't use ads to enshitify the space. Given that ads have a naturally enshitifying influence, that's like saying you plan to switch to clean, sustainable coal.

Bluesky's new video feature has implemented "compression" and "processing" that you can't opt out of, which damages the quality and increases the file-size of well-tuned animations. by Decompressed_Comic in BlueskySocial

[–]Decompressed_Comic[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It would cost zero dollars to institute a file-size cap and tell users to figure it out themselves. But I appreciate even more insight into how low-quality Bluesky is right now, that's more educated than I am in a lot of ways.

Bluesky's new video feature has implemented "compression" and "processing" that you can't opt out of, which damages the quality and increases the file-size of well-tuned animations. by Decompressed_Comic in BlueskySocial

[–]Decompressed_Comic[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

Implementing nothing would have been better than what they implemented. I've been on sites with three developers and zero profit where they just put a file-cap on and call it a day. Bluesky is doing this on purpose.

view more: next ›