I don't directly use the XviD codec; I use the standard Win32 VFW API to load video clips and play them back. I wanted to include XviD in the installer
Then it's a complete non-issue, isn't it? You'll have to mention that the Xvid installer you've included isn't LGPLd like the rest of the code, but other than that, the license doesn't matter. If you can include a commercial codec, you can surely use a GPL'd codec in it's place.
I wanted to include XviD in the installer so that my users would have a quality codec ready to go without having to pay any license fees.
The Xvid project has not paid the MPEG-4 license fees, so your users would have to do that. In fact, it would probably be illegal for you to distribute the Xvid installer. As a matter of fact, Xvid is in violation of the GPL as it is, being a patented codec and all.
The developer stated that because XviD is GPL, all of my code (and any scripts my users wrote, as well) had to be GPL, otherwise I would be violating the GPL.
Either this developer was some nobody on a mailing list, or he completely misunderstood your question.
Because of this, I ended up having to include a commercial codec with a less insane license instead.
It's rarely legal to re-distribute a commercial product, particularly together with your own software.
In addition, ffmpeg/libavcodec is LGPLd. That you somehow didn't find ffdshow is surprising.
From all the incorrect info in your post, I have to assume this is all simply made-up.
For a company *releasing* software under an open-source license BSD has no real advantages and many disadvantages.
That depends on whether others using the software you released counts as an advantage.
OpenSSH vs. Fressh OpenSSL vs. GPG NFS vs. Coda/Samba/SFS/etc.
If you want people to use your software, you BSD-license it, because companies aren't going to accept it if it forces them to open source their code. You won't ever seen MusePack support in a hardware player like the Rio Karma because of the LGPL license.
If the TCP/IP stack wasn't under a BSD license, we'd probably still be using IPX... That's probably also why all the NFS replacements have failed to catch-on, even though they actually have some security to speak of.
If you're being greedy, willing to release something as open source only if you can get something back, then the GPL is the way to go. If you want people to actually use it, you need to BSD-license it.
For for-profit companies, BSD gives all the benefits to the selfish companies and penalises the generous companies.
That's ridiculous. You don't lose anything if you give away the code to something, and don't get anything in return.
No, that's certainly not true. MP3s were very popular (on WWW and FTP sites) years before Napster came along.
Napster wouldn't have become popular if it was using a new format nobody had ever heard-of before. It became popular because many people already had large collections of MP3s on their computers they were able to share.
What does Windows have "going against it" that would be fundamental barriers to achieving the above?
Unreliable and various PC hardware.
Re:You are offtopic, and what's more, wrong
on
DECnet Isn't Dead
·
· Score: 1
I'll bet you $100 (no kidding) that you can't defend your position with passages (not just quotes) from the Bible.
You must be kidding. "sexual immorality" appears hundreds of times in the bible. Old and New testament alike.
It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am. 9But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
14Rather, clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not think about how to gratify the desires of the sinful nature.
Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
18Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body.
at what point did you decide that the rules in the Old Testament didn't apply to Christians?
I didn't. To what are referring?
Or maybe you should spend your time thinking for yourself, instead of blindly following rules set down by people almost a thousand years ago.
Ah, I see. Despite your claims, you're really just an anti-Christian troll, making baseless claims, to try and seem as if you have some legitimacy.
First of all, you're not going to find anything about a prophet or Christ demanding virginity.
1 Corinthians 7:6 to 7:10
Not a demand, but close enough to it.
what you will find, if you check the original Hebrew and Greek, is that Jesus, an unmarried man, had sex, as did at least one of his disciples.
Now that is complete and utter bullshit, that you can't back-up to save your life.
Re:you've probably had sex with a woman, too
on
DECnet Isn't Dead
·
· Score: 1
they're also called 'right-wing fundamentalists' or 'Bible thumpers.' I know for a fact there's nothing more Christian than saying another person isn't "Christian" enough.
No, those terms usually apply to people trying to push their religous views on others (eg. the Teri Schiavo case) or inserting religion into every discussion. Pointing out what is and is not actually Christian in a discussion about Christianity is quite different.
Re:you've probably had sex with a woman, too
on
DECnet Isn't Dead
·
· Score: 1
That's asinine. People make mistakes
Yes, but the post to which I was replying was not talking about an occasional mistake.
MP3s caught on a lot later than that, 98 or so, when 500 MHz+ systems were standard.
I remember the time-period very well. 400MHz systems may have been available around 98, but they weren't common, and I'm sure 500MHz systems weren't around (unless we're talking about Alphas now).
In any event, back then, computers were much more expensive, and the vast installed-base were several years old, so most people were still using 100MHz systems. Back then, a new computer every 4 years was pretty good.
(The system I bought in 96 was old (and cheap), and it was 400 MHz).
I doubt that very much. Your memory is probably fuzzy. The system I got in 1996 was a Pentium Pro 200Mhz system, and it was top-of-the-line and pocket-book shattering at the time. It's still here, routng packets for me...
are somehow excusable when hosted on commodity hardware?
Saying how great VMS was, compared to Windows, is a ridiculous comparison. Windows has a lot more things going against it than VMS did. If he compared Windows to other OSes running on comodity hardware (eg. Linux, BSD, etc), I wouldn't complain.
One reason MP3 encoding has caught on is because it takes 10 minutes to rip and encode a CD. I doubt it would be as popular if everything was recorded in real-time.
Way back when MP3 encoding starting catching-on, encoding really was real-time (or less) on 95% of the computer hardware. That was back when it sounded like crap, by today's standards, too. Try using lame on a 100MHz system, and see how long it takes to rip your CDs.
Your assertion doesn't even stand-up to the laugh-test.
it will send a signal to content companies to support such formats as SACD, as the format's design naturally prevents playback (and hence any sort of ripping) on computers entirely (as the technology has not been licensed).
Haha! You could have used that same argument for Sony's MiniDisc long before SACD came along, and we all know how that has turned out...
Being incompatible and obscure isn't a plus by any accounts.
So, your average HS/college teenager with 50,000 mp3s is going to buy them all (at 1$ a pop, 50,000$?). Be serious.
So the average teenager has 50,000 mp3s? Be serious. Just try and provide some evidence to back that up, or stop making noise.
Besides, since when does each song, regardless of length, cost $1? I've bought plenty of CDs with about 2 dozen songs, for $10. Not to mention that it isn't so much money when spread out over a couple decades of collecting... Hell, your insane $50,000 mark is only $200/month over 20 years.
Would they buy a tenth? Not a chance.
I anxiously await your sources for these assertions. Studies, surveys, anything you like that you didn't just make-up on the spot.
CSS was decoded because some idiot DVD player manufacturer let out an unencrypted key.
That's how DeCSS originally worked. However, it was shortly after that CSS was really cracked, so you're really quite wrong.
This is being done by re-encoding an output stream. You could do the same thing by sticking a microphone next to your speakers.
This is stupid. There is a huge difference between grabing a decrypted audio stream on your PC, and grabbing the output of your soundcard. If you get the audio before it goes to your card, you have ZERO LOSS.
It's not to be "foolproof" where no one can make copies, it's to make it hard enough that the casual music fan decides it's easier just to buy the music than go through the hassle of installing software.
Also idiotic. We are talking about the encryption ON THE MUSIC THAT YOU ALREADY BOUGHT. If you bought it, you may need to install extra software. If you didn't buy it, you are saved that hassle.
The idea that encryption makes it easier on legal buyers is patently ridiculous, and directly opposite to reality. The fact that your comment got modded up is really quite sad.
Re:you've probably had sex with a woman, too
on
DECnet Isn't Dead
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Being a Christian means saving yourself until the right woman comes along.
No, it doesn't.
Yes, it certainly does.
"Christian" doesn't mean following the rules you like, and ignoring the ones you don't. Many people like to call themselves Christians and ignore the rules, but that's completely different.
A dollar for a dvd is a dollar too much for something you won't watch.
A dollar for a DVD you watch just once, is a great deal.
When you rent a DVD, you get charged $4, only have 1 or 2 days to watch it, and can't give it to your neighbor's kids when you decide you don't like it...
A $1 DVD you don't like very much is still a far better deal than spending $40 to go watch Gigli at the theatre!
Most people will think, "Gee, I'd like to buy that for $1 online but I won't pay $2 for shipping and handling on something that only costs $1"
The USPS only charges 37 cents even if you DON'T presort, like all mass-mailers do. For that 37 cents, you can ship TWO DVDs (in one envelope) across the country.
Now, you won't get the large cardboard DVD box you're used-to, but for $1, I'm sure most people would be happy with a small cardboard or paper sleeve.
I'll agree with him that Internet2 hasn't lived-up to what it should have been, and trying something completely different would be a very good idea.
However, I don't agree that the current internet is in-need of replacement. Creating TCP/IP packets requires significant processing power, and a simpler protocol would mean more devices being online, but by the time anything new becomes accepted, a $1 chip will be able to do it all.
If you want to improve the internet, put explicit congestion notification back into all TCP stacks, as it was before the BSD stack left it out... Goodbye massive packet loss due to minor congestion. Require all vendors to support jumbo frames... And many more small changes (to the existing internet).
Most of the time, when I tune into the local news they have pieces about young black victims of shootings.
Yeah, there are plenty of those, too. Not to mention black/hispanic gang fights at schools lately.
Re:Weapons of Mass Destruction?
on
Liquid Hydrogen UAV
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Not a chance. The US has had UAVs for a LONG TIME, and that didn't change a thing. Where did you think they got the Aerial photos they showed to the UN, claiming it was a bio weapons lab? UAVs.
Am I the only one seeing a relationship here? We should pray for all TV to die. We should wish TV on our enemies.
But all TV won't die. If you just let broadcast die, that means all you'll have left is cable.
Now, it's possible that the big networks (ABC, CBS, NBC) would survive on satellite/cable-only, but unlikely. So, if we lose broadcast, where will most people get their news? Fox News Channel!
The best thing about OTA broadcast is their public contract. They're obligated to contribute to the public good, which mainly means decent news programs. If they weren't there to keep everyone honest, god help us.
If we drop all TV, the alternative for most people is talk radio... Even worse.
Newspapers, while a few are good, I dare say that most aren't a big step-up from Fox News and Talk Radio. I know my local paper is certainly crap.
Slashdot Mirror
Then it's a complete non-issue, isn't it? You'll have to mention that the Xvid installer you've included isn't LGPLd like the rest of the code, but other than that, the license doesn't matter. If you can include a commercial codec, you can surely use a GPL'd codec in it's place.
The Xvid project has not paid the MPEG-4 license fees, so your users would have to do that. In fact, it would probably be illegal for you to distribute the Xvid installer. As a matter of fact, Xvid is in violation of the GPL as it is, being a patented codec and all.
Either this developer was some nobody on a mailing list, or he completely misunderstood your question.
It's rarely legal to re-distribute a commercial product, particularly together with your own software.
In addition, ffmpeg/libavcodec is LGPLd. That you somehow didn't find ffdshow is surprising.
From all the incorrect info in your post, I have to assume this is all simply made-up.
That depends on whether others using the software you released counts as an advantage.
OpenSSH vs. Fressh
OpenSSL vs. GPG
NFS vs. Coda/Samba/SFS/etc.
If you want people to use your software, you BSD-license it, because companies aren't going to accept it if it forces them to open source their code. You won't ever seen MusePack support in a hardware player like the Rio Karma because of the LGPL license.
If the TCP/IP stack wasn't under a BSD license, we'd probably still be using IPX... That's probably also why all the NFS replacements have failed to catch-on, even though they actually have some security to speak of.
If you're being greedy, willing to release something as open source only if you can get something back, then the GPL is the way to go. If you want people to actually use it, you need to BSD-license it.
That's ridiculous. You don't lose anything if you give away the code to something, and don't get anything in return.
No, that's certainly not true. MP3s were very popular (on WWW and FTP sites) years before Napster came along.
Napster wouldn't have become popular if it was using a new format nobody had ever heard-of before. It became popular because many people already had large collections of MP3s on their computers they were able to share.
Unreliable and various PC hardware.
You must be kidding. "sexual immorality" appears hundreds of times in the bible. Old and New testament alike.
It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am. 9But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
14Rather, clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not think about how to gratify the desires of the sinful nature.
Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
18Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body.
I didn't. To what are referring?
Ah, I see. Despite your claims, you're really just an anti-Christian troll, making baseless claims, to try and seem as if you have some legitimacy.
1 Corinthians 7:6 to 7:10
Not a demand, but close enough to it.
Now that is complete and utter bullshit, that you can't back-up to save your life.
No, those terms usually apply to people trying to push their religous views on others (eg. the Teri Schiavo case) or inserting religion into every discussion. Pointing out what is and is not actually Christian in a discussion about Christianity is quite different.
Yes, but the post to which I was replying was not talking about an occasional mistake.
You seem to simply be misreading this discussion.
I remember the time-period very well. 400MHz systems may have been available around 98, but they weren't common, and I'm sure 500MHz systems weren't around (unless we're talking about Alphas now).
In any event, back then, computers were much more expensive, and the vast installed-base were several years old, so most people were still using 100MHz systems. Back then, a new computer every 4 years was pretty good.
I doubt that very much. Your memory is probably fuzzy. The system I got in 1996 was a Pentium Pro 200Mhz system, and it was top-of-the-line and pocket-book shattering at the time. It's still here, routng packets for me...
Here we go, according to Wikipedia:
The Deschutes core Pentium IIs which debuted at 333 MHz in January 1998 [...]
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pentium
Since 333MHz CPUs didn't debut until 1998, I seriously doubt you bought an old and cheap 400MHz system in 96.
The Bible never condemed forgiveness.
Of course, Jesus never called himself a Christian either...
That was propoganda of the church, not a scientific theory.
From the begining of time, there has been ample evidence that the world isn't actually flat, that even the most ignorant observer could pick-up on.
Saying how great VMS was, compared to Windows, is a ridiculous comparison. Windows has a lot more things going against it than VMS did. If he compared Windows to other OSes running on comodity hardware (eg. Linux, BSD, etc), I wouldn't complain.
Way back when MP3 encoding starting catching-on, encoding really was real-time (or less) on 95% of the computer hardware. That was back when it sounded like crap, by today's standards, too. Try using lame on a 100MHz system, and see how long it takes to rip your CDs.
Your assertion doesn't even stand-up to the laugh-test.
Haha! You could have used that same argument for Sony's MiniDisc long before SACD came along, and we all know how that has turned out...
Being incompatible and obscure isn't a plus by any accounts.
So the average teenager has 50,000 mp3s? Be serious. Just try and provide some evidence to back that up, or stop making noise.
Besides, since when does each song, regardless of length, cost $1? I've bought plenty of CDs with about 2 dozen songs, for $10. Not to mention that it isn't so much money when spread out over a couple decades of collecting... Hell, your insane $50,000 mark is only $200/month over 20 years.
I anxiously await your sources for these assertions. Studies, surveys, anything you like that you didn't just make-up on the spot.
That's how DeCSS originally worked. However, it was shortly after that CSS was really cracked, so you're really quite wrong.
This is stupid. There is a huge difference between grabing a decrypted audio stream on your PC, and grabbing the output of your soundcard. If you get the audio before it goes to your card, you have ZERO LOSS.
Also idiotic. We are talking about the encryption ON THE MUSIC THAT YOU ALREADY BOUGHT. If you bought it, you may need to install extra software. If you didn't buy it, you are saved that hassle.
The idea that encryption makes it easier on legal buyers is patently ridiculous, and directly opposite to reality. The fact that your comment got modded up is really quite sad.
Yes, it certainly does.
"Christian" doesn't mean following the rules you like, and ignoring the ones you don't. Many people like to call themselves Christians and ignore the rules, but that's completely different.
Yes, great comparison... Because VMS was a GUI desktop operating system, sold for $99, and ran on commodity hardware (ie. no ECC) that cost $200.
Charging $100,000 for a cell-phone would also be ridiculous, but might make them more money...
A dollar for a DVD you watch just once, is a great deal.
When you rent a DVD, you get charged $4, only have 1 or 2 days to watch it, and can't give it to your neighbor's kids when you decide you don't like it...
A $1 DVD you don't like very much is still a far better deal than spending $40 to go watch Gigli at the theatre!
The USPS only charges 37 cents even if you DON'T presort, like all mass-mailers do. For that 37 cents, you can ship TWO DVDs (in one envelope) across the country.
Now, you won't get the large cardboard DVD box you're used-to, but for $1, I'm sure most people would be happy with a small cardboard or paper sleeve.
I'll agree with him that Internet2 hasn't lived-up to what it should have been, and trying something completely different would be a very good idea.
However, I don't agree that the current internet is in-need of replacement. Creating TCP/IP packets requires significant processing power, and a simpler protocol would mean more devices being online, but by the time anything new becomes accepted, a $1 chip will be able to do it all.
If you want to improve the internet, put explicit congestion notification back into all TCP stacks, as it was before the BSD stack left it out... Goodbye massive packet loss due to minor congestion. Require all vendors to support jumbo frames... And many more small changes (to the existing internet).
Yes, really.
Yeah, there are plenty of those, too. Not to mention black/hispanic gang fights at schools lately.
Not a chance. The US has had UAVs for a LONG TIME, and that didn't change a thing. Where did you think they got the Aerial photos they showed to the UN, claiming it was a bio weapons lab? UAVs.
No, I haven't noticed that. I've noticed several young black kidnap victims in the past month on my local news (L.A.).
But all TV won't die. If you just let broadcast die, that means all you'll have left is cable.
Now, it's possible that the big networks (ABC, CBS, NBC) would survive on satellite/cable-only, but unlikely. So, if we lose broadcast, where will most people get their news? Fox News Channel!
The best thing about OTA broadcast is their public contract. They're obligated to contribute to the public good, which mainly means decent news programs. If they weren't there to keep everyone honest, god help us.
If we drop all TV, the alternative for most people is talk radio... Even worse.
Newspapers, while a few are good, I dare say that most aren't a big step-up from Fox News and Talk Radio. I know my local paper is certainly crap.