Sanguinez

5 ms·

1.
by Sanguinez 17y ago
Companies can be successful and making a lot of money without taking away their users' freedom. It doesn't make them evil, but it makes me loose any interest in their products.
2.
by Sanguinez 17y ago
"What on earth are you talking about? The issue as it pertains to the spec was decided over six months ago. Here is the post by the editor of the spec saying so: http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-Jun... . Neither h.2
3.
by Sanguinez 17y ago
"They already do this by letting users install Flash -- in fact, they make it particularly easy to do so, patent-encumbered though it is. And as I've pointed out before, they use Flash to play h.264 video anyway. The difference with <vi
4.
by Sanguinez 17y ago
"The burden of what? Deciding what video content is acceptable? Like I said before, that should not be Mozilla's role, but it's the one they've taken on." The burden of dealing with patent encumbered formats. Someone would have to pay or it
5.
by Sanguinez 17y ago
This is still about an open web. Using gstreamer would just be passing the burden onto others without solving much. Users would be able to watch h264 videos, but they wouldn't be aware of patent issues and wouldn't care since it works for t
6.
by Sanguinez 17y ago
Any stats to back up your wild claims and non-sense assumptions?
7.
by Sanguinez 17y ago
Then users shouldn't use patent encumbered formats. Simple as that. There already been enough mess by formats supported by browser X but not Y.
8.
by Sanguinez 17y ago
Their actions come from their values. And they happen to value an open web and free software. So yes, it is actually useful. And then, how would you qualify apple by not supporting theora in safari? They are keeping their users from watchin
9.
by Sanguinez 17y ago
Just to be clear. From OSI (see http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd ): "1. Free Redistribution The license shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution containin
10.
by Sanguinez 17y ago
There is a huge difference between "not valuing freedom" and "valuing advantage X more than freedom". This is not all or nothing. This is not a case of "you are either with us or against us". Repeating "stupid" and "dumb" over and over will
11.
by Sanguinez 17y ago
Why is it bullshit? I never implied anything about you/ How using H.264 would be beneficial to free software and open standards? This is really about how much you value your freedom. About at what point you will abandon your freedom for any
12.
by Sanguinez 17y ago
Yes I mean software freedom. Well, free software (whether it is GNU/GPL or BSD-like) allow you to sell it. But how could it remain free (as in freedom) if redistribution has strings attached?
13.
by Sanguinez 17y ago
VLC's faq should give you some answer : Regarding Patentable Inventions, the second paragraph of article 52 of the European Patent Convention (EPC) states: The following (..) shall not be regarded as [patentable] inventions: scientifi
14.
by Sanguinez 17y ago
So it looks like your value your freedom to $0.20. "And remember, I am still allowed to do anything I want with the code. I just have to give MPEG-LA half a can of beer do it." Then free software would'nt be ablo to be free software. You ca
15.
by Sanguinez 17y ago
Ah so if YOU don't worry about, I guess everything is going to be fine :)
16.
by Sanguinez 17y ago
It just depends how much you value your freedom.
17.
by Sanguinez 17y ago
It reminds me that: http://www.dragonflylodge.org/foaf/dns4people.html I think I am gonna work on a side project around that.
18.
by Sanguinez 17y ago
That's a very limited way of looking at free software. Free software gives you some very important freedom you wouldn't have otherwise. It also improves software quality ("given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow.") and development.
19.
by Sanguinez 17y ago
As a user I could as well contract a company to adapt, develop or/and support a free software to my needs. As an example there are all these companies providing services for nagios. Companies could as well share the cost of a developer to b
20.
by Sanguinez 17y ago
When I say logs, I mean all sort of logs (network, system, app...). So that include auth logs, apache logs and so on.
21.
by Sanguinez 17y ago
There isn't one single solution to cover all angles. So yes, logs are useful but won't protect you either. And yes, they could help you to discover intrusion. Regarding authentication, you could use public/private key auth for ssh. This is
22.
by Sanguinez 17y ago
* you use logs so you can be aware of suspicious events at network, system and app level * you have scripts to analyze these logs and notify you if anything suspicious happens. This is faster, can be done more often and is less tedious for