Content
@
0 reply
4 recasts
4 reactions
C O M P Ξ Z
@compez.eth
I would like to know that, Is it challenging to support MP4 files with a maximum size of 10 MB within the structure of fc:frame:image or even a new fc:frame:video? It's surprising that frames support GIFs but not MP4s! GIF files are very low quality and outdated. We need mp4 format support within the frame. :) @v @dwr.eth
12 replies
2 recasts
18 reactions
iSpeakNerd
@ispeaknerd.eth
@cassie has words about this I'm sure
2 replies
0 recast
3 reactions
Cassie Heart
@cassie
It's complicated. Warpcast presently utilizes a proxy to issue the request for image data/interaction calls to prevent frames from capturing IPs passively of users. Proxying small images is a different problem space from proxying streaming video. Also, video file formats have unique problems – MP4 is a container format, meaning many codecs may be at play, and some codecs are more safely built than others. It wasn't that long ago that Apple closed a vulnerability on one of the various video codecs, and if you go a bit farther back in history, a pretty massive one _even if you followed the spec properly_ for audio formats. I'm very for video frames, but doing it will require a lot more care than yoloing a video tag
2 replies
0 recast
5 reactions
C O M P Ξ Z
@compez.eth
Thanks for the clarification, Cassie! Can we hope to see improvements in this field in the future? Or can we expect to improve this static situation a little? For example, HTML5 support is built-in (embedded) for a more dynamic and lively output!
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Sheetal
@sheetal
thanks for the summarising the issues @cassie so when a FID updates their profile pic what's the difference on the FC infrastructure picking up the IP ? thanks
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
