DAV1D: A New AV1 Video Decoder From The VideoLAN Developers

[oleid]

And yeah I'll start to provoke people in any Rust-related thread from now on, for payback.

Really a cutie

[jacob]

that we require fast decoder. fast coder is not required by us. even in universe where fast coder is never created, av1 would be huge success

Well "you" may not require an encoder but "we" certainly do. AV1 can be successful even if it's kept jealously confined to youtube and netflix, but that's a totally meaningless argument. By the same logic "we" would not require a Rust compiler (since that's what the thread seems to be hijacked to) because Microsoft already has one internally and "we" don't need it to run their proprietary binaries, right?

[jacob]

We have one: https://github.com/xiph/rav1e

Yes I know. There is also libaom. Neither is really usable at the moment. That's why it's urgent for either of them to evolve to become a practically viable replacement to HEVC.

[fuzz]

Frames per second per second?

High acceleration fps! I'm givin' her all she's got, captain!

[jacob]

High acceleration fps! I'm givin' her all she's got, captain!

Well here's a novel concept at last. How's that for hardware acceleration? No other codec in the world supports that!

[schmidtbag]

The last huge case I remember is SourceForce, where they changed the installers of certain projects (like GIMP) to include adware. That was in 2015.

You are fully right to be irritated by that, but as far as I'm concerned, adware isn't malware. It's just simply a nuisance.
It's kind of like poison vs venom - they're both toxins that will hurt you but they're very distinctly different.

Why doesn't that happen more often - i.e. in case of trojans? Possibly, because many people get their software these days from "stores" like Google/Windows/Apple or Steam. But these stores don't qualify as "a source that actually gives a damn about security". And that's the part of your previous answer I'm not comfortable with and hence my answer. If the source "gives a damn about security", I either don't get my stuff from it, or I have to guard myself against possible attacks from that very source. At least my opinion.

I would argue they care about security quite a bit (especially Apple - they're pretty picky about what's allowed in their store). In my experience, each of these stores cares about maintaining an ecosystem that pleases the consumer. What gives you the impression they're not secure?

[tildearrow]

Scary with decoders written in C.
I think it would be preferable to have parsers and decoders written in Rust, in order to increase security and stability.

I hope you are happy with low FPS 4K video... (unless you aren't scared of assembly)

[oleid]

I would argue they care about security quite a bit (especially Apple - they're pretty picky about what's allowed in their store). In my experience, each of these stores cares about maintaining an ecosystem that pleases the consumer. What gives you the impression they're not secure?

No, quite the opposite. This is what I wanted to say. I do not think that they are "a source that actually gives a damn about security". Hence fewer malware/adware/whateverware cases in this decade. English isn't my mother tongue, probably I expressed myself incorrectly before.

[oleid]

I hope you are happy with low FPS 4K video... (unless you aren't scared of assembly)

I don't see any difference between the two languages (C and rust). Both can use in-line assembly, intrinsics and/or simd if you wish to do so.

[tildearrow]

I don't see any difference between the two languages (C and rust). Both can use in-line assembly, intrinsics and/or simd if you wish to do so.

What I meant is that if uid313 wants a decoder written in pure Rust (no assembly optimizations (because they may be unsafe to uid313)) he may need to accept slow decoding, especially on high-resolution videos.