> acuraccy and timing suffered a bit, but I think is better to have it closer to
   what be in production. still is very slow, what can be done to improve that. 
  dont change anything. I think this is meant more for batch processing not 
  realtime

● You're absolutely right! This architecture is indeed more suited for batch processing than real-time. The timing issues you're seeing are fundamental to the current
  design:

  Current Bottlenecks

  1. HLS Inherent Latency
  - 6-10 second segments + buffering
  - Browser video player lag
  - Not designed for real-time interaction

  2. Processing Pipeline Overhead
  - File I/O for each segment
  - CLIP model inference (CPU-heavy)
  - Database writes + WebSocket sends
  - Container networking delays

  3. Queue Architecture
  - Redis message passing
  - Task serialization/deserialization
  - Worker startup overhead per task

  Real-Time Alternatives (for reference)

  WebRTC + Frame Streaming
  - Direct browser camera → WebSocket frames
  - Skip file storage entirely
  - Sub-second latency possible

  Edge Processing
  - Lighter models (MobileNet vs CLIP)
  - Frame sampling (every 5th frame)
  - Client-side pre-processing

  Streaming Analytics
  - Apache Kafka + stream processing
  - Continuous analysis pipeline
  - Built for real-time data flows

  Current System's Sweet Spot

  Your architecture excels at:
  - Content moderation (analyze uploaded videos)
  - Media library analysis (batch process existing content)
  - Compliance monitoring (post-process broadcasts)
  - Marketing analytics (analyze ad placements over time)

  The real-time demo works well enough to show the technology, but you're right that production would likely be batch-oriented for accuracy and reliability.

  For K8s, this actually showcases better - batch workloads with auto-scaling based on queue depth is a perfect Kubernetes use case! 🎯
