Search Battle Heading to Video 100
loid_void wrote to mention a Wired story covering the video search battle between the major portals. From the article: "As millions of broadband subscribers who missed a wardrobe-malfunction moment on TV can attest, the internet can be a convenient resource for finding much-talked-about events on video. Large net portals and a handful of smaller sites are looking to change that. In recent weeks, Yahoo, Google and MSN have each rolled out services designed to make it easier to upload or locate video online. The portals' rollouts come as a handful of startups and independent film sites are creating tools to make putting video online nearly as simple as publishing text."
Heh (Score:2, Funny)
Seems a bit poorly worded to me.
Re:Heh (Score:1)
I was confused by the first part of that sentence. It makes it sound like having broadband caused people to miss the wardrobe malfunction.
Re:Heh (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Heh (Score:1)
"But until recently, internet users who don't patronize peer-to-peer sites had few options for tracking down video content outside of entering a query in a standard search box. Large net portals and a handful of smaller sites are looking to change that."
Re:Heh (Score:1)
Re:Heh (Score:2)
Come on, DRM technology, copyright banter. They don't want it to be more convenient. They want it to be impossible, so they can sell it back to you
As technology advances.. (Score:3, Funny)
There is a downside... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:There is a downside... (Score:4, Insightful)
A good search engine will reliably steer people towards what they are looking for
If people who aren't looking for Mr. Goat-Se end up seeing him "on accident", that's a sign that the search engine sucks.
Unless,.. (Score:1)
Re:As technology advances.. (Score:5, Interesting)
I see the potential for the greatest abuse with a video search engine. Just like bad wesbites use meta-tags and other dirty tricks to get high hits, I can see the same thing with video. But where you can protect yourself against spyware websites by turning off active-x and the such, how do you protect yourself against video. You click on the mpeg and boom, malware.
We need a sandbox for this
Recently, Yahoo launched a beta version of a service called Media RSS that lets anyone with footage submit videos for distribution
How can Yahoo check the content of what is sumbitted? Is there some kind of review?
What happens if NBC decides the "wardrobe malfunction" is their copywrited material and demands it be taken down. Will these searchs make it easier to take down content?
Re:As technology advances.. (Score:1)
Wait until a complaint comes in and deal with it then.
They don't currently take down every generic subject noticed by corporations, so what makes you think they will start now?
The search engine companies aren't stupid, and are certainly currently capable of handling indexes with multi billion webpage entries, some of which are already video.
Overblown worry for nothing.
Video is no more dangerous than any other f
Re:As technology advances.. (Score:2)
Re:Micropayments! (Score:2, Insightful)
"Freaking trust people for once."
But you prefaced it with this:
"It'll probably need DRM for RIAA to play along
First off, the RIAA won't have the issue with this, the MPAA will.
Regardless... who gives a tin shit what the RIAA or MPAA want on this? They'll push for regulation regardless, so there's really no need to beat them to the punch on it.
The best part of the web is the unregulated part. After a while it gets too unruly (see Napster I),
RIAA-MPAA connection (Score:3, Insightful)
First off, the RIAA won't have the issue with this, the MPAA will.
When you pirate a movie, you pirate all the songs and all the recordings contained therein. The four major record labels (Sony BMG, EMI, Warner, and Universal) license their music and recording repertories to the six major movie studios (Sony, Disney, Warner, Fox, Paramount, and Columbia), and the labels don't want their copyrights wantonly infringed any more than the movie studios do.
Re:Wow (Score:1)
WARNING: parse error (Score:4, Funny)
Finding videos on the internet is easy.
Large net portals and a handful of smaller sites are looking to change that.
So they're going to make it harder?
In recent weeks, Yahoo, Google and MSN have each rolled out services designed to make it easier to upload or locate video online.
But they're going to do that by making it easier?
Eighth post?
Re:WARNING: parse error (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re:WARNING: parse error (Score:2)
Re:WARNING: parse error (Score:2)
In fact, the submitter (or Slashdot) screwed up (Score:1)
This is how the original article says it-
As millions of broadband subscribers who missed a wardrobe-malfunction moment on TV can attest, the internet can be a convenient resource for finding much-talked-about events on video.
Whether it's Janet Jackson's Super Bowl breast exposure or The Daily Show host Jon Stewart's explosive ap
Changing Fast (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Changing Fast (Score:2)
Huh? WTF happened in the last two months? Is this 1998 again?
Re:Changing Fast (Score:2)
Re:Changing Fast (Score:3, Informative)
OurMedia [ourmedia.org].
Re:Changing Fast (Score:2, Informative)
Good... (Score:4, Interesting)
Besides being heavily abused by self abusers, this will have a few legitimate functions.
All those streaming events that happened a while back.. You know the ones you wanted to watch, but for some reason couldn't will be that much easier to find.
Also, sites that archive important Social events on video will get more hits. I know I have given up after trolling through a few dozen pages of google results. Hopefully you can find a few sources so you won't have to settle for one level of quality, like for JFK's assasination or whatever you need for whatever you need it for.
Really though, porn. Lots of p0rn. Sex is still in the top five searches...
Censorship/decency standards (Score:5, Interesting)
I have to admit, I've got a lot of sympathy for people who don't want to see particular things on TV--nudity, violence, whatever. I mean, I don't have a problem with it, and I don't think most content is socially harmful, but my preference not to be subjected to shit-sex videos is the same as some Mormon's preference not to see Janet Jackson's nipples.
That's the problem, though--broadcast TV is defined as a "public" medium, partly because everybody can and does receive it in the clear, and partly because (in the US and Canada, at least) spectrum rights are public property, and as such must serve the public interests, meaning that the content on those waves shouldn't be terribly offensive to many people.
But I really, REALLY dislike the idea of government-appointed (or even elected) censors dictating what can go on the air, or imposing after-the-fact fines when broadcasters step out of line.
So I say, fuck broadcasting. Go radical--eliminate the concept of broadcast TV, as we know it. Practical transition problems aside, this could solve a lot of problems. Give those frequencies up to metropolitan-area data transmissions, and get those people online. With the combination of:
1) fast, cheap, ubiquitous Internet access,
2) content providers offering TV-similar video online (streaming TV shows instead of broadcasting them),
3) effective and comprehensive video search capabilities that work at least as well as mid-1990s text search engines.
On the Internet, it's a lot easier to see what you want and avoid what you dislike. The Mormons get their wholesome family crud, and I get my skin flicks and pot jokes. Everybody's happy!
Re:Censorship/decency standards (Score:4, Insightful)
I like your solution, and I think it will happen eventually, but it's much more politically charged than you realize. If you think that everyone will be happy when it's possible for anyone to get "shit sex videos" on demand (even if they themselves never see them), you've got another think coming -- there are many, many people who think that there are some things that should not be available to anyone. Kiddie porn would be one obvious example.
Re:Censorship/decency standards (Score:3, Informative)
There is that Utah law that requires ISPs to give customers tools that can be used to self-censor, either in the form of parental-control software or rout
LOL... icon? (Score:2)
. The law places those materials (I think rightly so!) outside the realm of free speech and privacy protections beccause we assume that children were exploited/harmed in making them
Thing is that some moral conservatives would want to put lolicon [wikipedia.org] anime in the same category as live-action child pornography.
Re:Censorship/decency standards (Score:2)
You have a good point, here. The issue of why possession of kidde porn, versus actually making it, is illegal is a little more complicated. I think that the distinction isn't entirely motivated by legal theories, or by concrete and consistent philosophy.
Child pornography pushes a lot more buttons than murder... it seems strange, but sex crimes are far more visc
Re:Censorship/decency standards (Score:2)
Re:Censorship/decency standards (Score:2)
But I really, REALLY dislike the idea of government-appointed (or even elected) censors dictating what can go on the air, or imposing after-the-fact fin
Re:Censorship/decency standards (Score:2)
Re:Censorship/decency standards (Score:2)
LET'S MINIMIZE THE NEED FOR CENSORSHIP.
Isn't that a good thing? The quality of shows is entirely subjective--the LAST thing I want is somebody appointed by George Fucking Bush determining what kind of TV is "good" or "bad" in quality. Just imagine a world where the only thing on is "Seventh Heaven".
And you're sadly mistaken if you don't think that older TV existed solely for advertising. In fa
Re:Censorship/decency standards (Score:2)
Re:Censorship/decency standards (Score:2)
First o
Re:Censorship/decency standards (Score:2)
Good point! I conceed.
So why don't you do like the rest of us who feel that way, and buy a TiVo?
I don't want to pay a monthy fee for what my VCR did just fine.
Ummm... I think pro football is a little too violent for kids, but that's why I enjoy watching it.
Now you are humoring me. It is not violent. It is a team sport. If bringing someone down is violent, then society has become filled with pussies. Sor
Re:Censorship/decency standards (Score:2)
You say...
"What we need is more team effort. More sports. The sex, the booze, this is stuff that currupts people, it is worse than money."
But why in the world would anyone believe that when you also say...
"It is not violent. It is a team sport. If bringing someone down is violent, then society has become filled with pussies. Sorry, but if you cry after being tackeled, that is whack. It is no more violent than in baseball when a pitcher hits a batter."
Talk about 'whack'! That is the kind of attitu
The problem with going to internet distribution (Score:1)
Re:Censorship/decency standards (Score:2)
Re:Censorship/decency standards (Score:1)
Improved text search (Score:3, Insightful)
It seems that on the major search engines (google/yahoo/msn), there hasn't been any radical improvement in this area since google first came onto the scene.
And, right now, it's not like these search engines are sufficiently close to perfection yet that there's little room for improvement. For a good number of types of queries, the signal to noisy ratio can be bit too low.
Re:Improved text search (Score:2)
For anyone who codes or does web stuff (lots of ebooks and code), we need to be able to search punctuation and symbols (I'd even ask for a Regular Expression search if possible, or at least wildcards).
Right now if you try to search for something as simple as "a {" (w/o dbl quotes) you'd get lots o
Re:I hate to mention this, (Score:1)
Fair use for big corps (Score:4, Insightful)
Google would have a hell of time being a copyright cop; better to leave this function to the constantly shifting "grey" p2p world.
[1] unless the recent idea of a "permission culture" has overtaken your worldview.
Re:Fair use for big corps (Score:2, Interesting)
I can't think of any difference between that and Lokitorrent. Both, as you said, simply make it easier to search for pointers to data. Both Lokitorrent and Google can make the argument that they can't control what they index.
But Google gets away with it, and will get away with the video search, because they're a big company, and big companies tend to get free passes on this sort of thing. It's easy for the
Re:Fair use for big corps (Score:2)
That doesn't seem to work for me. Google needs to be able to read the fileformat that you instruct it to look inside, so with something like .rtf filters have been created specifically for it. But you are correct, it is possible to use google to find torrents by just serching for followed by "torrent".
Re:Fair use for big corps (Score:2)
Someone is going to make an assload of money from internet film downloads eventually. What if google just decided that it should be them? They've got an obscene amount of cheap bandwidth and storage
Give everyone a couple of gig upload space, load the download pages with ad words and knuckle down for the court battle. They've got a lot of money at the moment- if they throw it all into a copyright law war chest things could get interesting.
One word.... (Score:2)
PORN!
HELP (Score:2)
I'm just bummed google doesn't support NSV (Score:3, Interesting)
They support MPG and MOV, but not NSV. I can sort of understand the logic behind this, you can watch mpeg anywhere, but the mov part I don't understand. You pretty much have to download the quicktime player to watch mov's.
If they're going to support one major companies streaming format, why not real, wmv and nsv?
I just think supporting any video format, that for the masses (folks that don't know better) requires a download of a player that constantly tries to take over ever file association on your system is wrong. I always tell quicktime "No, please don't try and take over my midi, I have a wavetable card, no, don't take over my other sound and movie formats, please stop bugging me to download additional components" but like a bad child it just keeps bugging me.
NSV was purely a windows thing for a while, but now mplayer and VLC support it. You can watch vp3 encoded videos on any system with those clients on any system. Also on2 has made the vp3 codec open source, and there are versions of it for anything.
Just my critique on one of the new video services. Yeah is sort of rantish, so what?
--toq
Re:I'm just bummed google doesn't support NSV (Score:2)
Compare to Real Player, Quicktime is heaven. The hordes of options to disable on install is ridiculous.
Now I don't know why they don't do Real and WMV. Probably they will. But to
Re:I'm just bummed google doesn't support NSV (Score:2)
btw I never even heard of NSV before I read your post but I hate wmv, asf and real for their poor quality and high error ratio
Re:I'm just bummed google doesn't support NSV (Score:2)
-1: MisInformative
Yes, MPlayer now supports playing NSV streams, but NOT files. NSV support chokes on downloadable NSV files, and it has no support for seeking in NSV files anyhow.
As opposed to Real, WMV, Divx, what? To watch a video made in a format, you have to download a pl
Geez (Score:3, Funny)
Anyone got an imdb link for it?
be honest ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Without porn... (Score:1)
Aggregation (Score:2)
However, the more people who are trying to break into this market, the more it is going to split up collecti
Re:Aggregation (Score:2)
Right - just like iTunes. Apple makes it very convenient to legally access a modestly large archive of music, but if you want access to ENTIRE SUPERSET out there, then you've got to use the slightly-less-conveinent-P2P which doesn't have to bother pushing against the legal friction of securing righ
Re:Aggregation (Score:1)
http://www.participatoryculture.org/ [participatoryculture.org] seems promissing.
Oh, come on! (Score:2)
Come on! It already
So, big whoop that all these sites are getting 'in on teh action', but it's not like we're talking about anything new here, unless we're talking contextual search of video, direct f
Ok, let's cut to the chase... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Ok, let's cut to the chase... (Score:1)
Re:Ok, let's cut to the chase... (Score:1, Funny)
Stop touching me.
Randy
The new age of search companies. (Score:1)
article needs rewording... (Score:1)
Klaatu...Verrata...[something] (Score:3, Insightful)
I was recently trying to explain the humour in the following dialogue exchange from Army of Darkness to a friend, but he didn't get it. Maybe pasting together the two clips would work better.
Ash: Klaatu verrata nectu.
Wise man: Again.
Ash: Klaatu verrata nectu.
Wise man: Again.
Ash: I got it, I got it. I know your damn words, right?
[...time passes until the critical moment, Ash tries to remember...]
Ash: Klaatu verrata n... Necktie... Nickel... It's an "N" word, it's definitely an "N" word!
Ash: Klaatu verrata [under his breath] nekt agh agh ahh.
[The evil dead attack because of Ash's ignorance/arrogance/bluff]
a desireable side-effect of all this... (Score:1)
Yes, I mean a replacement for these bloodsucking leeches. [gemstartvguide.com]
Why? Because
Think about it... (Score:2)