⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don’t request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don’t request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don’t submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others

Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
🏴☠️ Other communities
Torrenting:
- !seedboxes@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !trackers@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !qbittorrent@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !libretorrent@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Gaming:
- !steamdeckpirates@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !newyuzupiracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !switchpirates@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !3dspiracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- !retropirates@lemmy.dbzer0.com
💰 Please help cover server costs.
- 1 user online
- 110 users / day
- 343 users / week
- 1.11K users / month
- 3.24K users / 6 months
- 1 subscriber
- 3.84K Posts
- 90K Comments
- Modlog
How would you use that in a sentence? Like “You can compress the hell out of the video and it’s transparent”?
deleted by creator
You’d describe the encoding, not the source. The fun part is that it also applies to audio. “At 256 kbps, MP3 is transparent.”
It only applies to lossy codecs. Lossless codecs, by definition, have no error. “Error” itself being a borrowed term. Good encodings don’t have fewer errors… they have less error. For example, measured as mean squared error, where an individual sample being very wrong counts more than many samples being slightly wrong.
“the encode is transparent”