Why does Jitsi Meet totally peak out my CPU, even with the camera turned off, and nobody else in the room with me? They must be running some bloated ass Javascript

I also notice that it take a few minute before my CPU (dual core 1.6Ghz) goes back to normal after I close the #JitsiMeet tab. Hmmmm ...

@strypey hey I've been wanting to test Jitsi. I often use ZOOM. It's proprietary but has great a feature set. I'd 100% prefer to drive eyes to something like Jitsi. Your experience sounds like I might need to use some caution.

@david_ross be aware that my computer was new when the Ark was being built ...
https://www.coactivate.org/projects/disintermedia/bishop

@david_ross , but I tried logging in with #OpenBox, instead of #GNOME #Fallback, OB uses a bunch less CPU while idlng, and Jitsi Meet still pushed the CPU to 99% without doing anything but idlng with no cam. I also tried the #FramaSoft instance (#FramaTalk) and it was just the same

@david_ross I'm excited about testing #NextCloudTalk, the new #WebRTC app for the NC platform. I believe it's a rewrite of #Spreed, so I'm hoping that means it's a bit more resource efficient than #JitsiMeet

@strypey I brought this up on a Mozilla vols call today. Thanks for the update!

@david_ross @strypey Please kill #WebRTC with fire until it is a crispy charred hunk of Zuul meat.

Thanks.

@Shufei @david_ross I don't know, #WebRTC is pretty useful. #WebTorrent is built on it, for example

@strypey @Shufei I used WebRTC yesterday as a lightweight video conference tool with someone using Ubuntu who struggled with other platforms. It worked first time and seamlessly.

I genuinely don't understand the hate.

@david_ross @strypey It breaks VPN. Virtually every web browser which has it, has it enabled by default, causing obvious security risks. I’m glad it has legitimate uses for them who want it. I’ll never want it, for anything I can see.

But yes, I suppose I ought to be grateful. Ripping out WebRTC by the roots was a nice little education in tweaking obscure options in about:config, etc. And being more sceptical of even Mozilla browser defaults.

@Shufei @strypey hey it sounds like this specific user model needs Tor Browser and not a general use multimedia browser like Firefox?

@david_ross @strypey Mmm, sometimes one needs VPN without Tor. Though it’s definitely a good suggestion, this.

@Shufei @david_ross would be good if #WebRTC can be turned on and off as needed, with the user explicitly giving permission for each site trying to us it, like #Firefox does with cam and mic

@strypey @Shufei @david_ross I have never understood this idea of hiding IP address on secure alt tech servers as we would be nieve to not understand that governments/isp's/corporations holesale cleact IP address flying over the #openweb we actually know they do this from Snowden etc. #securitytheater #geekproblem is dangerous to sell/push this fig leaf? As I say I have never understood this? Comments?

@Hamishcampbell @Shufei @david_ross IP addresses can be *very* easily tracked back to individual users. Without the ability to obscure your IP address, no other anonymization will work. That's why #Indymedia sites, and other activist services like #RiseUp, state very publicly that they don't log IPs. It's precisely because of the always-on mass survellance #Snowden confirmed (but we had always suspected) that obscuring IPs is important.

@strypey @Shufei @david_ross yes but bad acters could (and do) track ip addresses going over the open internet and no amount of not loging at server can block that. If this is true then fig leafs are danguruse if you rearly need privacy. We have not been clear in saying this, we need to be.

@Hamishcampbell @Shufei @david_ross can you explain exactly what you mean when you say "track ip addresses going over the open internet", with links to some specifics?