What is Reddit's opinion of MediaCrush?

From 3.5 billion Reddit comments

Hi there! Our API is well documented and open source. Feel free to join us devs on IRC or shoot an email over to if you need some help, /u/ljdawson :)

Thanks, pen0r, you rock.

I am from MediaCrush and I don't know of any shadiness going on with /u/Why_S0_Serious. MediaCrush is an open-source endeavor and we publish a lot of info to be as transparent as possible, so hopefully you can take my word for it.

Hi! Thanks for your considerations. Storage is pretty cheap, that's the least of our concerns. However it's not a bad idea, and I've been thinking about it for a while - I also share a lot of screenshots like that.

I've added a note in our bug tracker, so keep an eye on it to know when it's done!

EDIT: if we don't end up doing it ourselves it would be a perfect use case for a third-party app.

NoScript (rather stupidly) blocks cross-domain XHR (technical stuff). I suggest whitelisting MediaCrush. All of our JavaScript is open-source, so you can probably trust it.

This might come of as advertisement but I do like, and use this service. https://mediacru.sh/ will take a gif and convert it to to a HTML compatible video format. One thing that I feel differs this service from others is their privacy policy and the source is on Github.

Hey cool. Still though, for the sake of everyone else, maybe submit a main link to Imgur and then in the comments host the higher quality mirror in the comments? I definitely prefer Imgur's speed over a few seconds of load time (I'm super lazy).

I've been working on a site that does just this, and lots of other things too. Also, it's open source, free as in freedom and beer. Here's OP's post. Let me know what you think!

MediaCrush is reliable. Two downtime events in the past year (<2 hours each) and files don't expire (unlike Imgur). We're also open source and we host webm in addition to static images. Bonus: we do the HTML5 GIF thing and we support albums. I'm here if you have any questions.

Additionally regarding mediacrush links, it's likely a problem with NoScript. Whitelist mediacru.sh in NoScript and you should be fine. It's because of a bug with how NoScript handles XHR over cross-domain requests.

If you're worried about mediacru.sh's scripts, don't be.

This may be a problem because you have NoScript, and because of the way MediaCrush works with RES (there is currently a MediaCrush link on the front page of /r/all).

As a workaround, you could give https://mediacru.sh and https://cdn.mediacru.sh permission to run JavaScript, or you could disable NoScript. If it makes you feel any better, MediaCrush is open-source, so all of the JavaScript is online and publicly auditable, so it's probably not that risky to enable it.

A proper fix has gone into the next release of RES, so a workaround like this will not be neccessary.

Disclaimer: I am one of the guys who works on MediaCrush

I don't know how to work NoScript, but you can add this to your hosts file (on Windows, this is in %SystemRoot%\system32\drivers\etc\hosts and at /etc/hosts on Linux):

127.0.0.1 mediacru.sh 127.0.0.1 cdn.mediacru.sh

That being said, any reason why you don't feel comfortable giving us script privledges? MediaCrush is open source, which means our JavaScript is available to be modified and audited by the public. We also respect things like Do Not Track and generally try to do no evil.

I saw /u/Ponox's post and thought it was a good idea. Here's how you do it!

First, install ffmpeg. I suggest aur/ffmpeg-full, but extra/ffmpeg will do the trick on Arch Linux. If you use a debian derivative, send hate mail to your package maintainers and build it yourself. Enable x11grab.

If you don't have a triple headed setup like me, you can probably do the final encode in real time, like so:

ffmpeg -video_size 1920x1080 -framerate 30 -f x11grab -i :0.0+0,0 -vcodec libx264 -preset fast output.mp4

The final file will be reasonably sized. Adjust the values as appropriate for your resolution. If you DO have a big-ass resolution and you can't encode that in real time, first do a super fast encode:

ffmpeg -video_size 1920x1080 -framerate 30 -f x11grab -i :0.0+0,0 -vcodec libx264 -crf 0 -preset ultrafast output.mp4

-crf 0 makes it lossless and -preset ultrafast tells x264 to value encoding speed over encoding quality. This will produce an enormous file, which you can reencode to a more reasonable size after the fact:

ffmpeg -i output.mp4 -vcodec libx264 -preset slower final.mp4

This will be a more reasonable size.

I can answer any encoding questions or ffmpeg questions you might have. I built the site this video is hosted on, and it's open source: https://github.com/MediaCrush/MediaCrush. Feel free to consult the code if you're curious about how it does encoding.

This is the song I was listening to. This is my wallpaper (no lossy compression on MC).

Before Mediacrush went down they did a pretty good job:

https://github.com/MediaCrush/MediaCrush

You could try self hosting this maybe?

I'm debating about building my own thing tbh, but it'll be months before I get anywhere and I may change my mind :p

MediaCrush is open source, and offers a nice interface for hosting media. Even though the original site is down, you could probably host your own instance. However, I don't know if the developers will continue to work on the project now that the site is dead.

We rolled our own CDN using DigitalOcean droplets. They were just a debian box with nginx configured as a caching reverse proxy. Config

I was going to suggest MediaCrush, but then...

> MediaCrush is being shut down today. Before I tell you why, I want to clarify a few things: > > All content uploaded prior to today remains available
> The open source project is still alive and well > > It's been a year and a half and we've come to the point where we can no longer continue this project. We have reached our storage capacity, and our ad revenue and donations are lower than ever. We cannot justify expanding our infrastructure and costs to continue losing money on this project. I'm extremely grateful to the folks who have been here for us, but it's time for us to move on to other things.

Edit: it also said that existing uploads would remain available, but I guess that turned out to be false. MediaCru.sh seems to have gone offline completely.

I'm trusting them on this as they are not doing it for a profit. And silly commits like this and this one make me think what's on GitHub is what they're currently running.

I've filed an issue for the first problem. As for albums being immutable, that's by design. Just create another album if you didn't like the first - we'll make this easier eventually by letting you create albums from items in your history.

If you use mediacrush.js, it'll handle sizing the frame for you. If not, you can check out how the frame communicates with mediacrush.js on our GitHub, here: https://github.com/MediaCrush/MediaCrush/blob/master/scripts/mediacrush.js#L91

I'm glad to hear that MC is working better now, thanks!

Here's my zsh profile (it's raw zsh, doesn't require any plugins or anything). Ships with a bunch of useful aliases. Screenshot and feature list included in the readme:

https://github.com/jleclanche/dotfiles

It's pretty popular amongst linuxians I know/work with. Suggestions welcome!

Edit: Also, upload images/videos to mediacrush from your command line. It's bigger than a simple function but I find it extremely useful (then again, I wrote it): https://github.com/MediaCrush/MediaCrush-cli

Wait, I uploaded a jpeg and it looks like MediaCrush only stripped it from its metadata. That's why I compressed it myself because a 15% lossless size reduction was worth it. Haven't you looked at lossless compression of jpegs?

And I mostly hate lossy compression of images myself, but sometimes you practically can't see a difference like here.

That's a great idea. I've just opened an issue on our backlog, I'll see if we can make it happen. Since you know how to code, maybe you can help implement it?