• föderal umdrehen@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    76
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    I really don’t see the what the fuss is in this thread. The source does make it seem a bit nefarious, but even so, it appears the changes in VLC amount to adding support for a streaming format and adding a channel listing of some sort.

    FAST is simply a streaming format. Whether to run ads is an individual decision of each channel.

    If I can have a streaming client that can play certain streams versus one that can’t, I’ll obviously pick the former. (Unless they employ a DRM scheme which does weird things to my devices but it doesn’t appear that’s part of the discussion here.)

    • Otter@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Yep, here’s the section

      When he was talking about that, he also shared that they plan to add support for FAST channels and other kinds of ad-supported online media streams that would allow users to watch ad-supported movies, TV shows, and more.

      However, he also clarified that plans for this were not finalized yet, and if it were to happen, it would be optional for VLC users.

      .

      It does when you consider that there are over 1,500 FAST channels in the US alone, plus countless others around the globe, with the number still growing.

      They already support other forms of streams, why not this. It would be weirder if they chose to not support it

    • eveninghere@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yeah, I think evil bastard streaming services choosing open source (VLC) is rather a win for the society.