The real shame is that it had to exist in the first place and that DLNA was never adequate for this.
Of course this isn't a general solution since it requires patching the binary instead of having some other way to use custom keys (they compile them into Chrome today, and of course other devices are even more closed).
0 - https://github.com/thibauts/node-castv2/issues/2#issuecommen...
1 - https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=809249
Upnp was build for home automation so i guess it was too ambitious considering the company political minefield. Its successor dpws lives in an equally strange niche now: printer autoconfiguration. The open source community never cared much to provide robust free implementations. (I wrote upnp and dpws gateways for smartdevices more than 10 years ago and the situation hasnt changed since)
I think that's a mischaracterization. Given two identical experiences, one that locked you in and one that didn't, I'd imagine most people (though sadly not all) would choose the more open one.
The locked in experience here is simply substantially more seamless and out-of-the-box ready than the open alternative. Given that the point of a handover system is to make using multiple devices seamless, it's obvious that being "more seamless" is an advantage.
I setup a Chromecast for my mother who doesn't have cable or anything at home, and it took several explanations spread out over a year before she finally started using it on her own, but now she's using it daily. Any harder to use and it wouldn't have been helpful at all.
She's not exactly a luddite either, this is actually the first thing I've tried to teach her that she's struggled so hard with. Hopefully it's not a sign of aging...
You want some video to appear on the TV, so instead of driving some thing that's attached to the TV, you cause that thing to pull the video, using your phone or other device. It has never "clicked" for me.
Think of it like pushing the video you're watching to the other device. You're taking the thing you have and throwing it onto the TV.
It's less confusing if you don't think too hard about it.
You should be saying that the phone is a remote control.
That is both what's actually going on, and a paradigm everyone understands. And it's a stupid short and simple phrase to say. They've ingested it before they even got a chance to subconsciously go into "I don't want to try to figure this out." mode.
I would also say while giving that explaination something like "It's not you. Google intentionally makes this confusing because they want you to think you are casting or projecting something for who knows what marketing reasons." Takes the bad feelings of not understanding something off their shoulders and lets you both comiserate over a 3rd party, Google, and any stress is is laid on them instead of you or themselves. "You find this confusing and difficult, and guess what, so does your sysadmin son! Google is annoying but you & me will get it anyway."
> That is both what's actually going on, and a paradigm everyone understands. And it's a stupid short and simple phrase to say. They've ingested it before they even got a chance to subconsciously go into "I don't want to try to figure this out." mode.
I just finished saying that this strategy did not work for me for nearly a year, but please, tell me more.
Explaining it as a remote control is way more confusing because it doesn't behave like any remote control you've ever seen. Every other remote control (short of niche techie phone apps or expensive Logitech remotes that these users have never seen before) is a system where they press buttons to navigate menus or change things directly on the TV. This system requires them to select something on their phone instead, which is very confusing with the remote analogy.
> I would also say while giving that explaination something like "It's not you. Google intentionally makes this confusing because they want you to think you are casting or projecting something for who knows what marketing reasons."
I don't think it's marketing reasons. I think that unless you're super technical, it's just flat out an easier metaphor for people to understand.
Hell, even with an understanding of what's actually going on, I still don't think it's inaccurate. The lie is just that you're taking the source URL and credentials and casting them to the TV, rather than casting the content itself. But you are definitely moving state from one device to the other, and that's the metaphor the device is built around.
Although there concept is simple: your phone is the remote, you need to connect to the TV. The app you would normally play it on, shares it to the TV.
I don't know how to explain it more simple
Start watching something on your phone. Now hit this button, this is the button to send what you're watching to the TV. Now choose the TV. See, it's stopped playing on your phone and picked up on the TV from right where you were.
Other than the need for the two devices to each be connected to the same Wi-Fi network and the non-obviousness of being able to use your phone for other things once you start casting, I find it generally seamless, bit again I'm an 'inmate in the asylum' :)
I think it's sort of like what the other reply was talking about. Thinking about getting something onto the TV by opening something on her phone and then hitting some buttons was confusing.
I started presenting it as a process where you take something on your phone and push it to the TV, and I think that helped.
Instead just tell them to watch something on their phone. Then press this button and it sends it over to the TV instead. End of instructions. This was what finally made it click for my mother.
I don't think this is true or fair.
Competition in capitalism is the reason companies create ecosystems like this in the first place (and also different adapters ;P).
If we (the society) would reward interoperability and punish lock-downs e.g. because they are bad for customers and harm the environment the market would have no choice but react to this.
But because it is not like that we will suffer adapter-hell and missing interop until we dedicate enough effort, tears and blood to hack together systems that kind-of-work for some time (I've been there and done that, learned a lot and lost a lot of time and nerves in the process).
I only invest in ecosystems because it saves time and I can do what I intended to do instead of hacking and slaying my way to it. I hate the lock-down and if we would have more open alternatives I would jump on it in a minute but so far the open source world just can't offer some of the services/protocols/features that I just want to use.
When possible I still hack and I admire many very skilled people in this area so please don't get me wrong. E.g. I just jailbroke my iPad to get UTM (QEMU for iOS) running to break out of the "shiny apple ecosystem" but it is again more hacking and playing than doing some serious work or "just using stuff as it was intended to be used".
It is not the fault of the consumer alone while I am sure a rational consumer would put more knowledge and effort into politics and consumption to get companies more aligned with what is good for the planet and the people.
As long as most people only buy and never complain or do something about it this will probably not change.
My PC would show corrupted video streams, my iPhone worked via an included app but lacked any sort of context awareness (just blindly mirrors the screen) and doesn’t work well with DRM
I finally caved in after all these years and got an Apple TV and it’s so much nicer of an experience, even looking strictly at mirroring.
Apps are context aware to the fact they’re mirroring, much lower latency from my PC (despite using a 3rd party app), no weird dependency on WiFi for initial pairing (Window's native mirroring won’t work with my Miracast device because my PC doesn’t have a WiFi card installed)
I don’t know if it’s an ecosystem problem for Miracast (I’m pretty sure the only “high quality” implementation of it is the Microsoft adapter, but there’s an ocean of dongles that “support it”) or a technological limitation, but it wasn’t good
Lots of people dislike X11 and even more dislike the naked protocol.
It seems to work well from Windows 10 though.
Both bring angry geeks for different reasons, but as long as most people reward them for being locked up in a closed ecosystem, I don't see why they would change.
One of the things that kills these common standards is that every company has to tack on its own obscuring trade name. DLNA, HDMI-CEC, probably others I can't remember have all had this.
It's kind of a wonder that SMTP managed to be known as just "email", but even that is largely eroded into branded experiences.
DLNA could, in theory, be all things to all people, but like similar "all things" it's such a pain in the arse to get renderers and servers all talking to each other it never really "just works".
Of course, all of that wouldn't necessarily be a problem except that Apple and Google are deeply invested in non-compatibility.
The audio only version of AirPlay (AirTunes) goes back a decade before Miracast, and the version that also supports video predates Miracast by two years.
It would be nice to be able to add an iOS plugin to add system wide support for Miracast instead of just having some apps choose to support it.
I don’t know where the failing was, but it really only worked reliably when the compute device and TV were from the same manufacturer. Cross-vendor compatibility was hit or miss.
(It also didn’t help that different vendors used their own proprietary name for their Miracast feature - most users have no clue what Miracast is.)
(At one point open bluetooth was a thing, immediately exploited to drop dick pics to random strangers on public transport)
Given a box being able to reach Chromecast via standard IP routing and Chromecast being able to reach the box via a standard IP routing and a box being able to spinup a HTTP(s) sever one can cast to Chromecast. No need to be on a same network.
Catt does it.
The only thing being authenticated does is allows me to set the timezone, change the background art, and re-name it, which are all secondary features I don't need.
Don't think the common enduser would agree with that.
The largest use case for something from Plan9 is 9P transport used by QEMU to share host folders with guests.
For example Plan 9 was released in a market where UNIX was already successful and "good enough". So it was always going to be a tough sell. Whereas BeOS was released in an era when desktop OSs totally sucked (NT wasn't yet ready for home users, Windows 9x was an unstable mess, Mac OS 8 and 9 were even worse than Win 9x, Linux wasn't even remotely ready for the casual user and Atari / Amiga dead and becoming increasingly irrelevant in all but a few niche scenes). Even at that time it felt like desktop operating systems sucked and then along came BeOS and proved just how much better things could be. It felt light years ahead of the competition and yet still failed (I'm not bitter at all!)
It's also worth noting that Plan 9 did go on to influence UNIX and Linux quite a lot since. So while 9P transport might superficially feel like the only Plan 9 tool to survive (it's not because people do use other stuff like ACME), there's a lot of Plan 9's influence in modern *nix too (eg FUSE).
This does not pass the smell test. I can cast onto any of my Chromecasts using VLC and Catt and while the former is limited to media, Catt lets me render websites just fine.
I believe Catt's author is on HN.
However I'm still unclear... if the goal is to render output on Chromecast, a combination of ability to render web pages, video and audio streams and images seem to cover pretty much everything needed to interact with the device.
I believe the applications have to be registered with Google? (Who presumably can ban them?)
My point is why not push media/web pages using something like catt bypassing all the mess? I certainly see the appeal of using anything with HDMI port to push the media out but RPI and likes aren't anywhere close to Chromecast dongles in polish and what one needs for adoption is ease of use.
The point is we already have a cheap HDMI renderer that can be connected to a network, has a fantastic form factor, most of the needed features, is so incredibly brain-dead simple to use that my wife's mother who can't make a programmable coffee machine work took less than 10 minutes to connect it to watch Netflix and is available in Walmart/Target/BestBuy/OfficeDepot/Staples etc.
I have been playing with Jellyfin/Plex/etc recently and they are atrocious in the UX for anyone who is not invested in making them work well because they all try to solve all of the annoying problem of handling and organizing media libraries, pulling media sources together and interfacing with casting devices. They do everything OK, but do nothing well. Give their authors a solid way to cast to Chromecast that just works and we will have an explosion of content to TV solutions.
Also as an aside, AngelScript's is another of these programming language sites where sample code seems to be more than three clicks away from the homepage. I will admit I gave up before finding any.
It just works. It's accessible to anyone with their phone. The UI are the phone apps. It plus a few subscription services makes every other media box obsolete for us.
I got a Roku tv last month. For jokes I turned on WiFi and tried out the built in streaming. Just terrible. Great for people without phones, but who else would want that kind of experience?
I also find it really hard to fast forward and rewind... I never get the responsiveness that I get on my XBOX, and I can't rewind and fast forward with nearly the precision, either.
Comparing a $30 dongle and a multi hundred dollar computer seems a tad unfair. I'm not buying an xBox for my mom to watch Netflix.
If you have Google Home, the voice control is awesome. I feel like I'm in the future every time I tell it to pause.
I oddly did not have this experience at all. I could never get audio working properly, and then the Chromecast would make every other input to my TV randomly flash black if the Chromecast was plugged in. Returned to Best Buy after a couple days of wasted time and effort.
Ended up getting a Roku and couldn’t be happier. Only issue I ever have is misplacing the remote.
I'm currently working on a dedicated website for NymphCast (to be launched over the coming weeks/months), that will contain development guides for NymphCast apps and kin, as well as some AngelScript tutorials and references.
Since it's a hobby project at this point, any timescale I can give is relative of course :)
(I'm the NymphCast author)
Life is too short to struggle with basic stuff like watching Netflix when you want to relax.
I mean, I won't claim I never lose time on YT same as I used to on TV, occasionally, but as far as "brain drain" and "time suck" are concerned, it kinda depends on what you're into. I spend countless hours watching tech talks, math/sci news and teachings, podcasts with my heroes (on AI, CS, philosophy..) Some of it (most I'd say) helps in my work (not by chance, ofc).
Nowadays is by far the best audiovisual average quality of content I've ever had in my life (37 here), because I have the choice of what and when (even where & how with a phone). And it's not like I could ever watch all that's worthy so I can select with excruciatingly high standards (my motto with most media: consume only the very best, ditch everything else: you still won't have enough time to run of content, ever).
I think ultimately it's more about control, decisions we make for ourselves, provided the options are there (e.g. couldn't help but eat TV shit on some hours; can't blame myself for having rest time at the 'wrong' hour of TV, hence why I played so much video games back then maybe, which are much 'easier' and deeper time vortexes than any other video form content, IME).
I say, 'when in doubt, read a book'. Can't go wrong with doing that even if the book is mediocre.
Do you want to recommend anything on your list of good content channels?
- Lex Fridman — AI podcast: hall of fame of AI speaks there, and I really like Lex. https://www.youtube.com/user/lexfridman
- EngineerMan is one of the best teachers out there for the "get it done" simple PoC stuff — lots of cool tricks, crystal clear explaining. Mostly devops / system. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrUL8K81R4VBzm-KOYwrcxQ
- lots of conferences (all talks) get posted, so I tend to watch enough of those (not the 'big' marketing stuff like Google, more specific tech or domain driven like some language, paradigm, product...). It's my way to keep in touch with many of these spaces without spending more than a few hours per year: from the mouth of the lion (main keynote is usually 'enough' for the 20% effort). E.g. I heard Rob Pike maybe 6 months ago, so I know where Go is at on its ~10-year journey so far. It's also a great way to discover in-depth features when you're digging into a topic (again ideally, 1 as-fast-as-possible talk from developer themselves). You generally have to seek the relevant channel, e.g. for Pycon 2019 https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxs2IIVXaEHHA4BtTiWZ2mQ/vid...
- Coding Tech posts a lot of talks from all around the programming scene, and the curation is surprisingly good (some talks are really awesome, maybe half is quite decent). https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCtxCXg-UvSnTKPOzLH4wJaQ
- Level1Techs (and Level1Linux): Wendell is a nerd like us, but he's smarter and funnier at it than most. I love this guy. Real, real good perspectives. https://www.youtube.com/user/teksyndicate
- ServeTheHomeVideo: from the same website, a reference for all things DIY server (and frankly IT in most SMBs). https://www.youtube.com/user/ServeTheHomeVideo
- Gary Explains: he's just the best for all things mobile, ARM, etc. (very high-level, but he knows programming and sysadmin so he's not shallow like most popular YouTubers with those topics) https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRjSO-juFtngAeJGJRMdIZw
### Science, math:
- Isaac Arthur, possibly the best "aggregator" of hard sci-fi concepts, I've binged so much on his channel. Love the spirit. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZFipeZtQM5CKUjx6grh54g
- Anton Petrov is the best astrophysics and related science news I've ever had (10 minutes a day is enough for me). Almost real-time with papers, and plenty of skill to explain the stuff simply. A really "wonderful person"! https://www.youtube.com/user/whatdamath
- Dr. Becky, same as Anton Petrov, cool astrophysics. She studies galaxies! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYNbYGl89UUowy8oXkipC-Q
- the whole "-phile" suite — Computerphile, Numberphile, etc. Selectively, when I like the topic. https://www.youtube.com/user/Computerphile
- PBS Space Time, probably the best layman content to understand theories in astrophysics, and Matt is awesome. He studies black holes! (also consider PBS Infinite series which is inactive now). https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7_gcs09iThXybpVgjHZ_7g
- 3Blue1Brown, obviously, selectively for topics I need/like. (but I tend to binge his stuff because it's so good)
- Channels like MIT OpenCourseWare for lectures. https://www.youtube.com/user/MIT
- TED is not what it used to be, but worth watching a few sometimes (TEDx has disappointed me too many times with clickbait (waste of my time), so I really avoid it now unless someone human recommends a video).
- Talks at Google has some interesting stuff sometimes. https://www.youtube.com/user/AtGoogleTalks
- People like Socratica (math, Python), Andrew Dotson (physics), Zach Star (math), Kai Hendry (Linux, AWS..), "Machine Learning with Phil". It fluctuates in time as I discover new people or as their content becomes boring to me.
- Special mention for Robert Miles, AI safety researcher at Cambridge iirc. It's mostly abstract math / philo stuff (that funny boundary between the two), and really mind-blowing at times (I mean literally, not the smoking gun, just your mind melting down from thinking through the problem). I'm in awe at the talent of this young dude, so fluent with such topics. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLB7AzTwc6VFZrBsO2ucBMg
### More general stuff:
- Stefan Mischook has the best freelancer (and beginner developer) advice you can find, imho. He's a legit down-to-earth guy with a knack for telling it like it is in simple words. https://www.youtube.com/user/killerphp
- Joe Rogan, because why not! Selectively (mostly philo/sci guests and maybe 1% of his MMA-related stuff). https://www.youtube.com/user/PowerfulJRE
- these days I'd get informed on the coronavirus from doctors directly, e.g MedCram https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quDYb_x54DM
### Some music I like, examples of channels concepts:
- COLORS (really artful uncut live video recordings from up and going artists) https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2Qw1dzXDBAZPwS7zm37g8g
- InYourChill (background) https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCncxHd8o_VhhHAJ7QqB5azg
I also watch a few musicians who do impressive stuff, but that's more fleeting, no real sticker here for me. Just impressed at all the tatent out there!
### For fun:
- The Daily Show with Trevor Noah https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwWhs_6x42TyRM4Wstoq8HA
- Last Week Tonight with John Oliver https://www.youtube.com/user/LastWeekTonight
My MO is simple: I only look at my "subscription" page (ignore the 'home' page with suggestions most of the time). Occasionally, I'll look at the right pane suggestions and try things, but I'm quick to close the tab if it doesn't feel genuine.
Also, lots of backtracking. When I discover a channel that's great, I'll just spend months going through the catalog...
Somehow developers seem bad at putting themselves in the "customer's" shoes. So many GitHub Readme files filled with release notes, dependencies, donation requests, and installation instructions before telling what the repo actually does!
Chromecast simply sends commands to the TV/speaker, which does the streaming directly from source. You can use your device for something else.
As I understand it, even the Netflix TV client has custom extensions to perform more than the most basic functionality.
You also need to get that app approved onto the TV, which, chances are, require an update.
Sadly that means that you're likely never getting support for the majority of the devices already in the field.
DIAL's time has come and gone. Adoption during the SmartTV hey day 5+ years ago may have made it a contender.
There is no need to get anything approved onto a TV. The apps would run on a media device, such as a Raspberry Pi with the appropriate software, connected via HDMI to the TV just as the Chromecast does.
I'm from Chrome, someone on my team pointed me at this thread. My team supports casting features in Chrome. This is a fantastic project and it's great to see energy around this.
I get the frustration around the inability to make devices work together for casting. In the standards community, we have been working with other companies and researchers on a protocol  that provides the groundwork for interoperability in media streaming and media control on the Web between browsers/apps and devices. We are developing an open source implementation and plan to see it in future products.
There's a lot of other work going on in the Web standards community as well, that in the near future will allow Web apps to create their own media codec pipelines and streaming protocols customized to their needs  .
 https://github.com/WICG/web-transport (client/server), https://w3c.github.io/webrtc-quic/ (P2P)
If you have suggested use cases or questions engaging on GitHub through the standards repos is a great way to get involved or you can email firstname.lastname@example.org.
Some countries make it illegal, but France doesn't so I'd be happy to have such device.
We really need reasonable copyright laws.
Or they "work" but only in low resolution because your HDCP version is not good enough. If the pirated version is objectively better, then something is wrong with your product.
My convenience choice (and most I assume these days) is to completely skip offline/non-streamed media apart from what I create myself.
Sure, it is convenient until your software/hardware is no longer supported (same HDCP problems, codecs, DRM schemes), 4k is only available on... , the monthly rent increases, it is now bundled with Amazon Prime Plus Ultra, the company pulls an Adobe in Venezuela, the company gets bought by Comcast, the company goes bankrupt, ... .
For movies you unfortunately don't have much choice, but for games, ebooks and music you can find DRM free stores.
That sounds needlessly pessimistic. You could have said the same thing about music downloads several years ago, yet here we are (though music streaming admittedly goes in the other direction). People tend to choose based on convenience and music that I can easily take from my pc to put on my phone or wherever is more convenient than DRM stuff.
Doing this seemed to be unreasonably difficult. The closest thing to a solution I identified was using Mopidy along with Icecast, where Mopidy is the control plane and Icecast is the audio sink, and all client devices simply permanently connected to the shoutcast stream.
This "worked" but it is very frustrating for a simple use case. Mopidy used to be a MPD server implementation, but it has deprecated that in favor of its own API, and the client options were very limited. And nevermind video, this was just audio...
Anyway, I feel like NymphCast is a very welcome development, and I really hope that Maya will continue to work on it.
I have no plans to stop working on this project any time soon. Having it work as a ChromeCast Audio replacement was one of my initial thoughts back in 2019, and while the scope has slightly increased, that initial goal hasn't been altered.
After some feedback, I am prioritising the implementing of multi-target streaming (multiple speakers/TVs) so that this will exist (in some form) in the first release.
Another of the goals is for the whole system to be dead-simple to setup and use. Heavens know I have wasted enough of my life trying to make half-broken projects somewhat do what they were supposed to do. I'd rather my own projects are not among those :)
Certainly as an end user the MPD ecosystem looks to be "stagnant" to put it generously, many of the clients I tried demonstrated curious behavior, and at least for audio there don't seem to be any obvious alternative standards emerging to replace it yet.
DLNA (UPnP) is in theory perfect for this use case and it wouldn't be that hard to use it together with VLC and a Python script and I have indeed attempted this, but at the end just gave up due to the complexity of the protocol (and my laziness).
I am currently still in the market for a good casting solution like this. I'll probably try this, but at a first glance it seems like it may do a little more than I need.
Does anyone know any other similar projects?
I have an iPhone, and it can only send system-level audio to AirPlay. The Spotify app itself also supports streaming to Amazon devices. The YouTube app will also stream to a Chromecast.
It’s all so balkanized. I’m not sure making a new format/protocol will solve that problem, although if it is solvable that’s certainly the first step.
The real problem, quickly dismissed in this article, is support integrated into 1st party apps. Chromecast lets you use a streaming platform app 100% normally and then 2 clicks later it's playing on your big screen/speakers. You could implement some sort of bridge app (that you'd "share" the content to) but then you are switching between the streaming app for content discovery, and the bridge app for control. That's not the chromecast experience. The only way we can get that experience is with 1st class support built into the streaming app. Spotify/Google/soundcloud/Amazon have no reason at all to work on adding support for something new until it becomes popular, but that's obviously a chicken and egg situation. Chromecast support is already built in everywhere, but of course that's a non-starter since Google have locked everything down sufficiently to prevent implementation of a receiver. I don't know the answer to this.
It's however a lot of work, with spotty documentation and questionable support. That's why for the first release I haven't really bothered with it too much and instead focused on the core functionality of streaming audio and video, and controlling the NymphCast server from the client.
I must not understand because my argument is that the support absolutely must be built into the netflix and Spotify apps themselves, that seemless integration is what makes chromecast so usable. The media discovery and control needs to be in their app, not split between two different apps. So what can you do, other than provide a library for Spotify and Netflix to then ignore?
On the client side having it integrated into the 1st-party client apps would be great, yes. Right now in the SoundCloud app I implemented a basic track/album/author search function that uses the server-side app to search through the SoundCloud database.
Though barebones right now, it provides essentially the same functionality as using the SoundCloud website directly. I can imagine this approach working in a generic fashion, assuming some network-accessible API is available that provides this information.
Don't get me wrong, I think this would be a great thing to have and I'd love to get involved. For audio playback there is Mopidy (I'm a maintainer) which provides something similar but it would be so much better if there was a open chromecast-like protocol we could hook into and integrate into 1st-party apps rather than requiring the use of our clients.
I have intentionally made this the same as things work with ChromeCast.
I understood it that I can't use the actual soundcloud app with all its functionality that I'm used to. The same app I use when I'm playing music on my phone. I have to use your client app as that's the one which includes support for nymphcast. That's your client app where you've re-implemented some subset of the functionality I want. Soundcloud could integrate the nymphcast client sdk into their app and then I'd have the same experience I get now with chromecast, but why would they do that?
As they say, you already got the 'no', so why not try to get the 'yes' or 'maybe'? :)
For what my failed experience is worth, try getting some internal contacts at these companies. The public, and even "developer", contact channels for Spotify, Soundcloud, Tidal and TuneIn are a dead-end. At least, that has been my frustrating experience. Presumably if you throw them money they take you more seriously.
I use Roku devices + Samsung's 'SmartView' which I'm pretty sure is just rebranded MiraCast and it works like a champ.
I guess it doesn't handle the audio though.
Miracast and Chromecast were a garbage fire. In the end I only got AirPlay to work and even that wasn't without problems.
Chromecast will go of the way Google’s many Dodos. And good riddance!
In practice people are now buying Telescreens (not like there’s option tbh) and they have Android or at least Netflix already built in.
I'd be so happy to have an easy open source solution. I'm ready to spend some money on it too.
(I'm the author of NymphCast/NymphRPC, etc.)
"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."
 - https://e.foundation/
No, “nymph” like “nymph”, I would assume: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nymph
I asked my girlfriend what "nymphcast" sounded like to her and she agreed it seemed porn related.
Of course, it's only HN sport to bikeshed the name. I can't resist.
But I've certainly belabored this thread to its miserable end. :P
Unless you are rejecting it on puritan reasons, in which case I'll agree with the other commenters that there's a nonsexual interpretation too.
You should have assumed that your vocabulary is limited and as many other words this is a composed words, before making a fool of yourself IMO you should google/DDG the words.
A girl who is trying to find her way through the confusion of giftedness, human societies and her intersexuality. Her life is somewhat of a dramatic survival show. She is currently working on her autobiography.
To me, it mostly signals "A girl is working on this project and wants the name of it to signal that." If it were written by a guy and used a word that could be interpreted to mean "Studly," we probably wouldn't bat an eyelash. Many people likely wouldn't notice at all.
10 years ago in a forum like this, maybe; today, a third of the comments would be about the gender-exclusionary naming, and another third would be criticisms of first third, most of which would use the term “SJW”.
I'm 54 years old. I'm not as pretty as I used to be. I spent years believing I was sexually harassed because I was beautiful and feeling trapped because society also signals that being beautiful is required for a woman to be allowed to set foot outside.
I keep waiting to be old and ugly enough for men to take me seriously and stop acting like my gender and whether or not they would hit that is the entire question in their mind for how to relate to me. I've concluded that just being female is all it takes for far too many men to act like I'm nothing but a sex object. That beauty thing was straight up a lie I was being told.
She likely wants her more personal blog posts to remain available as support for others like her and an education opportunity for others. But it potentially goes bad places to focus on that element on an overwhelmingly male forum that normally talks about tech. Women are routinely enraged when their coding work or other work is essentially ignored so people can focus on her gender, how pretty she is, etc.
I spoke up initially to try to suggest "She's probably just a girl sick to death of being told she needs to actively hide her gender and went with a name she identifies with and it would be nice if the world didn't make a big fucking deal out of that."
That's perhaps putting out the fire with gasoline and just directing more attention to the detail of her gender. Unfortunately, I don't know enough code to talk about that and try to give that more focus.
On the upside, at least this conversation is happening at the bottom of the page and isn't at the top.
It's a nuisance problem with no clear solutions.