| Message ID | 20180228171742.17389-1-michael@niedermayer.cc |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On 28 February 2018 at 17:17, Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc> wrote: > The widget has new content. > Does it shut itself up when the time's passed now? Or check if the visitor's IP isn't from USA? > > This reverts commit 9275cd54eddb83faf5bd40ffaccb5717de8b798d. > --- > src/template_head2 | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/src/template_head2 b/src/template_head2 > index a0b11ab..71daf07 100644 > --- a/src/template_head2 > +++ b/src/template_head2 > @@ -3,6 +3,29 @@ > <script src="js/html5shiv.min.js"></script> > <script src="js/respond.min.js"></script> > <![endif]--> > + <script type="text/javascript"> > + var _bftn_options = { > + /* > + * Specify view cookie expiration. After initial view, modal will > not be > + * displayed to a user again until after this cookie expires. > Defaults to one > + * day. > + */ > + viewCookieExpires: 60, // @type {number} > + > + /* > + * Specify action cookie expiration. After initiating a call or > clicking a > + * donate link, modal will not be displayed to a user again until > after this > + * cookie expires. Defaults to one week. > + */ > + actionCookieExpires: 60, // @type {number} > + > + /* > + * Prevents the widget iframe from loading Google Analytics. > Defaults to false. > + */ > + disableGoogleAnalytics: true, // @type {boolean} > + }; > + </script> > + <script src="https://widget.battleforthenet.com/widget.js" > async></script> > > <link href="main.rss" rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" > title="ffmpeg.org" /> > <link rel="shortcut icon" href="favicon.ico" /> > -- > 2.16.2 > > _______________________________________________ > ffmpeg-devel mailing list > ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel >
On Wed, 28 Feb 2018 18:17:42 +0100 Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc> wrote: > The widget has new content. > > This reverts commit 9275cd54eddb83faf5bd40ffaccb5717de8b798d. > --- > src/template_head2 | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/src/template_head2 b/src/template_head2 > index a0b11ab..71daf07 100644 > --- a/src/template_head2 > +++ b/src/template_head2 > @@ -3,6 +3,29 @@ > <script src="js/html5shiv.min.js"></script> > <script src="js/respond.min.js"></script> > <![endif]--> > + <script type="text/javascript"> > + var _bftn_options = { > + /* > + * Specify view cookie expiration. After initial view, modal will not be > + * displayed to a user again until after this cookie expires. Defaults to one > + * day. > + */ > + viewCookieExpires: 60, // @type {number} > + > + /* > + * Specify action cookie expiration. After initiating a call or clicking a > + * donate link, modal will not be displayed to a user again until after this > + * cookie expires. Defaults to one week. > + */ > + actionCookieExpires: 60, // @type {number} > + > + /* > + * Prevents the widget iframe from loading Google Analytics. Defaults to false. > + */ > + disableGoogleAnalytics: true, // @type {boolean} > + }; > + </script> > + <script src="https://widget.battleforthenet.com/widget.js" async></script> > > <link href="main.rss" rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" title="ffmpeg.org" /> > <link rel="shortcut icon" href="favicon.ico" /> 1. Including active content from a 3rd party site we can't control is not a good idea. 2. Last time, it was in a broken state after the event (still showed up, and showed negative time or so). 3. There's no reason to bother people outside the US with US politics. 4. Is there a new campaign or what does the widget even do? I see something about Feb 27, which was yesterday.
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 06:28:44PM +0000, Ricardo Constantino wrote: > On 28 February 2018 at 17:17, Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc> > wrote: > > > The widget has new content. > > > > Does it shut itself up when the time's passed now? we can disable it manually easily if it does not > Or check if the visitor's IP isn't from USA? that is not always possible nor is the IP of the computer neccessarily from the same contry as the nationality of the human using the computer. Raising a bit awareness about this even if it does not YET affect people outside the USA doesnt seem to be that bad to me. Because if net neutrality falls in the US, others will (try to) copy it. The EU has a history of copying dumb decissions even if they where corrected already from the US ... id like to put a smily here but its just not funny from my point of view from the EU ... [...]
On 28 February 2018 at 19:13, Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 06:28:44PM +0000, Ricardo Constantino wrote: > > On 28 February 2018 at 17:17, Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc > > > > wrote: > > > > > The widget has new content. > > > > > > > > Does it shut itself up when the time's passed now? > > we can disable it manually easily if it does not > > > > Or check if the visitor's IP isn't from USA? > > that is not always possible nor is the IP of the computer > neccessarily from the same contry as the nationality of > the human using the computer. > > Raising a bit awareness about this even if it does not YET affect > people outside the USA doesnt seem to be that bad to me. > Because if net neutrality falls in the US, others will > (try to) copy it. The EU has a history of copying dumb decissions > even if they where corrected already from the US ... id like to > put a smily here but its just not funny from my point of view > from the EU ... > That still doesn't fix the issue that non-US people can't affect it or do any action other than tell about it on social media, which worked well enough for the US election. What about the fact that the time's past? Or is it another date? > > [...] > -- > Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB > > If you think the mosad wants you dead since a long time then you are either > wrong or dead since a long time. > > _______________________________________________ > ffmpeg-devel mailing list > ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel > >
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 7:17 PM, Michael Niedermayer
<michael@niedermayer.cc> wrote:
> + <script src="https://widget.battleforthenet.com/widget.js" async></script>
Please use https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Security/Subresource_Integrity
. That way this third-party entity will only get loaded if the content
matches a known checksum. Even better, host it locally.
(I have not checked if ffmpeg.org loads other sub-resources, but they
should get a similar treatment in general)
Personally, looking at the last year's fiasco of it not remembering
that you had already closed it, as well as showing up after the
"event" I am against this. But if someone thinks this is absolutely
necessary, we should at least take minimal steps to keep sub-resource
contamination at bay.
Best regards,
Jan
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 07:39:23PM +0100, wm4 wrote: > On Wed, 28 Feb 2018 18:17:42 +0100 > Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc> wrote: > > > The widget has new content. > > > > This reverts commit 9275cd54eddb83faf5bd40ffaccb5717de8b798d. > > --- > > src/template_head2 | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/src/template_head2 b/src/template_head2 > > index a0b11ab..71daf07 100644 > > --- a/src/template_head2 > > +++ b/src/template_head2 > > @@ -3,6 +3,29 @@ > > <script src="js/html5shiv.min.js"></script> > > <script src="js/respond.min.js"></script> > > <![endif]--> > > + <script type="text/javascript"> > > + var _bftn_options = { > > + /* > > + * Specify view cookie expiration. After initial view, modal will not be > > + * displayed to a user again until after this cookie expires. Defaults to one > > + * day. > > + */ > > + viewCookieExpires: 60, // @type {number} > > + > > + /* > > + * Specify action cookie expiration. After initiating a call or clicking a > > + * donate link, modal will not be displayed to a user again until after this > > + * cookie expires. Defaults to one week. > > + */ > > + actionCookieExpires: 60, // @type {number} > > + > > + /* > > + * Prevents the widget iframe from loading Google Analytics. Defaults to false. > > + */ > > + disableGoogleAnalytics: true, // @type {boolean} > > + }; > > + </script> > > + <script src="https://widget.battleforthenet.com/widget.js" async></script> > > > > <link href="main.rss" rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" title="ffmpeg.org" /> > > <link rel="shortcut icon" href="favicon.ico" /> > > 1. Including active content from a 3rd party site we can't control is > not a good idea. the script needs to stay updated to match the current events, this requires it to be on a 3rd party site for practicality. > 2. Last time, it was in a broken state after the event (still showed > up, and showed negative time or so). yes, if this happens again at the end, whoever notices first would disable it also the code is on github, you can send a pull request there if it has a bug > 3. There's no reason to bother people outside the US with US politics. Like it or not but the US has a influence on the rest of the world and its politics. What happens in the US to net neutrality will affect what happens in other countries in the future. It will affect lobby groups, suggested law changes, and is not unlikely IMO to affect actual future regulations outside the US one way or another. Raising a bit of awareness to this even outside the US doesnt seem a bad thing to me. This popup will not reapper once its closed unless the user deletes the cookie that tells it to not reappear. But you can of course send a pull request to the maintainers of that widget if you have some improvments > 4. Is there a new campaign or what does the widget even do? I see > something about Feb 27, which was yesterday. It appears to be a new campaign, i see no date on the widget text The deadline for this one is 60 days beginning on last thursday IIUC. Or maybe this is the overall deadline and there is less time for this. Do you object to this being pushed ? Iam asking so there is no misunderstanding in either direction. I intend to push this if there is no objection. Thanks [...]
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 07:17:25PM +0000, Ricardo Constantino wrote: > On 28 February 2018 at 19:13, Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc> > wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 06:28:44PM +0000, Ricardo Constantino wrote: > > > On 28 February 2018 at 17:17, Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > The widget has new content. > > > > > > > > > > > > Does it shut itself up when the time's passed now? > > > > we can disable it manually easily if it does not > > > > > > > Or check if the visitor's IP isn't from USA? > > > > that is not always possible nor is the IP of the computer > > neccessarily from the same contry as the nationality of > > the human using the computer. > > > > Raising a bit awareness about this even if it does not YET affect > > people outside the USA doesnt seem to be that bad to me. > > Because if net neutrality falls in the US, others will > > (try to) copy it. The EU has a history of copying dumb decissions > > even if they where corrected already from the US ... id like to > > put a smily here but its just not funny from my point of view > > from the EU ... > > > > That still doesn't fix the issue that non-US people can't affect it or do > any action other than tell about it on social media, which worked well > enough for the US election. yes, if you have a better idea, the place to discuss this would be someplace related to the widget. Maybe a issue on its github page Discussing this here wont help many no matter what the outcome [...]
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 09:52:19PM +0200, Jan Ekström wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 7:17 PM, Michael Niedermayer > <michael@niedermayer.cc> wrote: > > + <script src="https://widget.battleforthenet.com/widget.js" async></script> > > Please use https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Security/Subresource_Integrity > . That way this third-party entity will only get loaded if the content > matches a known checksum. Even better, host it locally. As the widget is activly developed, this is not easy for example there where multiple commits to its repository in the last 24h [...]
On Wed, 28 Feb 2018 21:00:27 +0100 Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 07:17:25PM +0000, Ricardo Constantino wrote: > > On 28 February 2018 at 19:13, Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc> > > wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 06:28:44PM +0000, Ricardo Constantino wrote: > > > > On 28 February 2018 at 17:17, Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > The widget has new content. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does it shut itself up when the time's passed now? > > > > > > we can disable it manually easily if it does not > > > > > > > > > > Or check if the visitor's IP isn't from USA? > > > > > > that is not always possible nor is the IP of the computer > > > neccessarily from the same contry as the nationality of > > > the human using the computer. > > > > > > Raising a bit awareness about this even if it does not YET affect > > > people outside the USA doesnt seem to be that bad to me. > > > Because if net neutrality falls in the US, others will > > > (try to) copy it. The EU has a history of copying dumb decissions > > > even if they where corrected already from the US ... id like to > > > put a smily here but its just not funny from my point of view > > > from the EU ... > > > > > > > That still doesn't fix the issue that non-US people can't affect it or do > > any action other than tell about it on social media, which worked well > > enough for the US election. > > yes, if you have a better idea, the place to discuss this would be someplace > related to the widget. Maybe a issue on its github page > > Discussing this here wont help many no matter what the outcome If they don't listen to our requests, but you insist on using their code, then I can't accept this patch.
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 10:10 PM, Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 09:52:19PM +0200, Jan Ekström wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 7:17 PM, Michael Niedermayer >> <michael@niedermayer.cc> wrote: >> > + <script src="https://widget.battleforthenet.com/widget.js" async></script> >> >> Please use https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Security/Subresource_Integrity >> . That way this third-party entity will only get loaded if the content >> matches a known checksum. Even better, host it locally. > > As the widget is activly developed, this is not easy > for example there where multiple commits to its repository in the last > 24h > Looking at how much it got updated the last time when it misbehaved shows really well how that worked the last time. Sorry if I sound facetious, but I do use ffmpeg-all.html a lot and it got /really/ irritating. Best regards, Jan
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 12:17 PM, Michael Niedermayer <
michael@niedermayer.cc> wrote:
> The widget has new content.
Could you elaborate on what the new content is? What political campaign
will we as project members support by applying this patch?
Thanks,
Ronald
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 03:25:51PM -0500, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 12:17 PM, Michael Niedermayer < > michael@niedermayer.cc> wrote: > > > The widget has new content. > > > Could you elaborate on what the new content is? yes, of course > What political campaign > will we as project members support by applying this patch? Its the same goal as previous, to protect net neutrality ATM IIUC one more vote is needed in the senate Its certainly imaginable that in a few days something else will be suggested by the widget to protect net neutrality as the situation changes ... Thats also why its not usfull at all to copy this widget locally or to use a checksum on it. It has to be able to adapt to changes in the political situation surrounding net neutrality Thanks [...]
On 28 February 2018 at 20:41, Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 03:25:51PM -0500, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 12:17 PM, Michael Niedermayer < > > michael@niedermayer.cc> wrote: > > > > > The widget has new content. > > > > > > Could you elaborate on what the new content is? > > yes, of course > > > > What political campaign > > will we as project members support by applying this patch? > > Its the same goal as previous, to protect net neutrality > ATM IIUC one more vote is needed in the senate > Its certainly imaginable that in a few days something else will be > suggested by the widget to protect net neutrality as the situation > changes ... > Except most of the information in https://www.battleforthenet.com/onemorevote/ only mentions yesterday's date. So what's the point of adding this now? > > Thats also why its not usfull at all to copy this widget locally or > to use a checksum on it. It has to be able to adapt to changes in the > political situation surrounding net neutrality > > Thanks > > > [...] > -- > Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB > > Asymptotically faster algorithms should always be preferred if you have > asymptotical amounts of data > > _______________________________________________ > ffmpeg-devel mailing list > ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel > >
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018, at 11:25 AM, Jan Ekström wrote: > > Looking at how much it got updated the last time when it misbehaved > shows really well how that worked the last time. Sorry if I sound > facetious, but I do use ffmpeg-all.html a lot and it got /really/ > irritating. +1. I object to the patch. The widget is annoyingly intrusive, but as a compromise I would not block a small, resized, temporary simple image banner in the bottom of the menu: <https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1gfot3MqZDAyBcmMUm2bunJMn5geNKf6v>
Hi, On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 3:41 PM, Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc > wrote: > ATM IIUC one more vote is needed in the senate Yikes. I would prefer if we don't meddle into politics like this. You ignore the fact that any legislation needs to go through the US House of Representatives, and then it should be signed (or conversely, can be vetoed) by the president. The situation in the US Senate is the most straightforward, because the Dems seat deficit is smallest (49 vs. 51). That doesn't mean that after that hurdle is taken, it's a done deal. Quite the contrary. We are a project concerned with multimedia software. We are not an American political organization. Please don't make us one; please reconsider this patch. Ronald
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 12:33:55PM -0900, Lou Logan wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018, at 11:25 AM, Jan Ekström wrote: > > > > Looking at how much it got updated the last time when it misbehaved > > shows really well how that worked the last time. Sorry if I sound > > facetious, but I do use ffmpeg-all.html a lot and it got /really/ > > irritating. > > +1. > > I object to the patch. The widget is annoyingly intrusive, How is it intrusive if it is displayed once and never shows again for 60 days (which is how its configured) if you close it ? It will show again if you delete the cookie it uses to keep track of you closing it i think. But MANY webpages will display silly first time notes if you loose cookies regularly. > but as a compromise I would not block a small, resized, temporary simple image banner in the bottom of the menu: > > <https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1gfot3MqZDAyBcmMUm2bunJMn5geNKf6v> If you put this there, its of course better than nothing but i dont know if this is wise as a replacement for the widget. As a user i much rather would want to be told that theres a problem in the future straight in the face and how i might be able to help fight against it. Instead of a banner i wont realize is there and wont click on and wont realize what it is about before iam hit with slower speed or increased fees from an ISP or increased fees from random companies who need to pay for fast lanes to keep operating Its in fact a slightly sinister scheme, people could end up paying alot more for their internet connection without realizing that they do. That is if they end up paying all the companies who in the future may have to pay for their connections not to be slowed down. The end user pays, the ISPs get the money but the path is not neccesarily direct. [...]
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 07:52:56PM -0500, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 3:41 PM, Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc > > wrote: > > > ATM IIUC one more vote is needed in the senate > > > Yikes. I would prefer if we don't meddle into politics like this. > > You ignore the fact that any legislation needs to go through the US House > of Representatives, and then it should be signed (or conversely, can be > vetoed) by the president. The situation in the US Senate is the most > straightforward, because the Dems seat deficit is smallest (49 vs. 51). > That doesn't mean that after that hurdle is taken, it's a done deal. Quite > the contrary. > > We are a project concerned with multimedia software. We are not an American > political organization. Please don't make us one; please reconsider this > patch. I dont disagree about the things you say above but you are ignoring an important detail here. multimedia being high bandwidth (and sometimes also low latency) could be one of the main areas of internet traffic hit by a loss of net neutrality. If thats the case, it could affect some if not many of our users. [...]
On 1 March 2018 at 01:19, Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 12:33:55PM -0900, Lou Logan wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018, at 11:25 AM, Jan Ekström wrote: > > > > > > Looking at how much it got updated the last time when it misbehaved > > > shows really well how that worked the last time. Sorry if I sound > > > facetious, but I do use ffmpeg-all.html a lot and it got /really/ > > > irritating. > > > > +1. > > > > I object to the patch. The widget is annoyingly intrusive, > > How is it intrusive if it is displayed once and never shows > again for 60 days (which is how its configured) if you close it ? > > It will show again if you delete the cookie it uses to keep track of > you closing it i think. But MANY webpages will display silly first time > notes if you loose cookies regularly. > Many people remove cookies from non-regular sites on closing the browser. Why would people suddenly need to keep a cookie in order to not get nagged on ffmpeg.org? > > > > but as a compromise I would not block a small, resized, temporary simple > image banner in the bottom of the menu: > > > > <https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1gfot3MqZDAyBcmMUm2bunJMn5geNK > f6v> > > If you put this there, its of course better than nothing > but i dont know if this is wise as a replacement for the widget. > It seems a very welcome alternative. Banners are way less annoying than fullscreen popups. > > As a user i much rather would want to be told that theres a problem in the > future straight in the face and how i might be able to help fight against > it. > Instead of a banner i wont realize is there and wont click on and wont > realize > what it is about before iam hit with slower speed or increased fees from > an ISP or increased fees from random companies who need to pay for fast > lanes > to keep operating > You can link whatever's the campaign webpage in the banner and whoever cares will go see it. Don't assume people will care more if you plaster it in their face and block what they were reading. > > Its in fact a slightly sinister scheme, people could end up paying alot > more > for their internet connection without realizing that they do. That is if > they > end up paying all the companies who in the future may have to pay for their > connections not to be slowed down. The end user pays, the ISPs get the > money > but the path is not neccesarily direct. > There's a lot more places where people can get their armchair politics satisfied than ffmpeg.org. A banner or a news post would make more sense. > > [...] > -- > Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB > > Rewriting code that is poorly written but fully understood is good. > Rewriting code that one doesnt understand is a sign that one is less smart > then the original author, trying to rewrite it will not make it better. > > _______________________________________________ > ffmpeg-devel mailing list > ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel > >
Hi, On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 6:49 AM, Ricardo Constantino <wiiaboo@gmail.com> wrote: > There's a lot more places where people can get their armchair politics > satisfied than ffmpeg.org. > I 100% agree with this ... > A banner or a news post would make more sense. ... but I pretty strongly disagree with this. Let's assume that I care about kittens. After all, we all know Youtube is the biggest video website in the world, and Youtube is filled primarily with cat videos. We should care about kittens, it's the center of our industry. Can I now advertise for my local kitten shelter on ffmpeg.org using a popup, banner or news post? Again, please: no advertising, no politics. It was fun while it lasted but it's turning into something semi-permanent now, I really have significant issues with this. Ronald
On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 11:49:16 +0000 Ricardo Constantino <wiiaboo@gmail.com> wrote: > On 1 March 2018 at 01:19, Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc> > wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 12:33:55PM -0900, Lou Logan wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018, at 11:25 AM, Jan Ekström wrote: > > > > > > > > Looking at how much it got updated the last time when it misbehaved > > > > shows really well how that worked the last time. Sorry if I sound > > > > facetious, but I do use ffmpeg-all.html a lot and it got /really/ > > > > irritating. > > > > > > +1. > > > > > > I object to the patch. The widget is annoyingly intrusive, > > > > How is it intrusive if it is displayed once and never shows > > again for 60 days (which is how its configured) if you close it ? > > > > > It will show again if you delete the cookie it uses to keep track of > > you closing it i think. But MANY webpages will display silly first time > > notes if you loose cookies regularly. > > > > > Many people remove cookies from non-regular sites on closing the browser. > Why would people suddenly need to keep a cookie in order to not get nagged > on ffmpeg.org? > > > > > > > > > but as a compromise I would not block a small, resized, temporary simple > > image banner in the bottom of the menu: > > > > > > <https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1gfot3MqZDAyBcmMUm2bunJMn5geNK > > f6v> > > > > If you put this there, its of course better than nothing > > but i dont know if this is wise as a replacement for the widget. > > > > It seems a very welcome alternative. Banners are way less annoying than > fullscreen popups. > > > > > > As a user i much rather would want to be told that theres a problem in the > > future straight in the face and how i might be able to help fight against > > it. > > Instead of a banner i wont realize is there and wont click on and wont > > realize > > what it is about before iam hit with slower speed or increased fees from > > an ISP or increased fees from random companies who need to pay for fast > > lanes > > to keep operating > > > > You can link whatever's the campaign webpage in the banner and whoever > cares will go see it. > Don't assume people will care more if you plaster it in their face and > block what they were reading. > > > > > > Its in fact a slightly sinister scheme, people could end up paying alot > > more > > for their internet connection without realizing that they do. That is if > > they > > end up paying all the companies who in the future may have to pay for their > > connections not to be slowed down. The end user pays, the ISPs get the > > money > > but the path is not neccesarily direct. > > > > There's a lot more places where people can get their armchair politics > satisfied than ffmpeg.org. > A banner or a news post would make more sense. > Yeah, I agree a banner of some sort would be less intrusive and still get noticed. We'd also not have to run foreign JS (that already proved to be buggy before). Seems like the best choice.
On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 13:17:08 +0100, wm4 <nfxjfg@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 11:49:16 +0000 > Ricardo Constantino <wiiaboo@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 1 March 2018 at 01:19, Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc> > > wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 12:33:55PM -0900, Lou Logan wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018, at 11:25 AM, Jan Ekström wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Looking at how much it got updated the last time when it misbehaved > > > > > shows really well how that worked the last time. Sorry if I sound > > > > > facetious, but I do use ffmpeg-all.html a lot and it got /really/ > > > > > irritating. > > > > > > > > +1. > > > > > > > > I object to the patch. The widget is annoyingly intrusive, > > > > > > How is it intrusive if it is displayed once and never shows > > > again for 60 days (which is how its configured) if you close it ? > > > > > > > > It will show again if you delete the cookie it uses to keep track of > > > you closing it i think. But MANY webpages will display silly first time > > > notes if you loose cookies regularly. > > > > > > > > > Many people remove cookies from non-regular sites on closing the browser. > > Why would people suddenly need to keep a cookie in order to not get nagged > > on ffmpeg.org? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but as a compromise I would not block a small, resized, temporary simple > > > image banner in the bottom of the menu: > > > > > > > > <https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1gfot3MqZDAyBcmMUm2bunJMn5geNK > > > f6v> > > > > > > If you put this there, its of course better than nothing > > > but i dont know if this is wise as a replacement for the widget. > > > > > > > It seems a very welcome alternative. Banners are way less annoying than > > fullscreen popups. > > > > > > > > > > As a user i much rather would want to be told that theres a problem in the > > > future straight in the face and how i might be able to help fight against > > > it. > > > Instead of a banner i wont realize is there and wont click on and wont > > > realize > > > what it is about before iam hit with slower speed or increased fees from > > > an ISP or increased fees from random companies who need to pay for fast > > > lanes > > > to keep operating > > > > > > > You can link whatever's the campaign webpage in the banner and whoever > > cares will go see it. > > Don't assume people will care more if you plaster it in their face and > > block what they were reading. > > > > > > > > > > Its in fact a slightly sinister scheme, people could end up paying alot > > > more > > > for their internet connection without realizing that they do. That is if > > > they > > > end up paying all the companies who in the future may have to pay for their > > > connections not to be slowed down. The end user pays, the ISPs get the > > > money > > > but the path is not neccesarily direct. > > > > > > > There's a lot more places where people can get their armchair politics > > satisfied than ffmpeg.org. > > A banner or a news post would make more sense. > > > > Yeah, I agree a banner of some sort would be less intrusive and still > get noticed. We'd also not have to run foreign JS (that already proved > to be buggy before). Seems like the best choice. I would prefer a static news post. Not because of security issues, I just dont like popups. For security, any developers complaining in this thread about security issues should be whitelisting javascript only, and disabling javascript everywhere else. Complaining about a 3rd party javascript, in this day and age, means you've already thrown in the towel on your browser security. or in lieu of a news post, make the widget only on ffmpeg.org/index , not on DOCS pages. I ran into the widget a few times too when it was misbehaving. I am not objecting outright, net neutrality is pretty important. And yes, you foreigners should be helping the USA with this, as THIS WILL affect the backbones. how many internet backbones are owned by US companies? non-usa people can help in some ways: 1. ask friends in usa to help 2. post on your own blogs and websites, spread the word 3. contact your local political representatives to tell them how net neutrality is important. -compn
On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 06:59:45 -0500, "Ronald S. Bultje" <rsbultje@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Again, please: no advertising, no politics. It was fun while it lasted but > it's turning into something semi-permanent now, I really have significant > issues with this. this isnt advertising. what is your significant issue with the politics? could you share your opinion please? -compn
Hi, On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 9:24 AM, Compn <tempn@mi.rr.com> wrote: > On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 06:59:45 -0500, "Ronald S. Bultje" > <rsbultje@gmail.com> wrote: > > Again, please: no advertising, no politics. It was fun while it lasted > but > > it's turning into something semi-permanent now, I really have significant > > issues with this. > > this isnt advertising. > > what is your significant issue with the politics? I'm so sick of everything being about politics, everything being politicized, everything being presented about the end of the world, and everything being pushed in my face and everyone being forced to continuously pay attention, have an opinion and to care. Because it's just not true. It's just a spin. Sure, some things are important. But the end of the world? Hardly. To put our reputation as a prime, pristine, independent and unpartisan collection of multimedia tools and experts on the line for an unlikely and minor moment of partisan gain in a single country. Really? Why? I just don't get it. If you want to play politics, join a political movement or party, attend or organize rallies, run for local, state or federal office, create a politically motivated youtube channel or facebook group. But don't use our website. My issue is this: this advertising turns FFmpeg into a political movement. But I don't want FFmpeg to be a political movement, or to be political at all. I would like FFmpeg to be an opensource (or free software) project where people with various interests in multimedia can come together - regardless of background - and create cool technical innovations. Ronald
On Sun, 4 Mar 2018 at 14:50 Ronald S. Bultje <rsbultje@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 9:24 AM, Compn <tempn@mi.rr.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 06:59:45 -0500, "Ronald S. Bultje" > > <rsbultje@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Again, please: no advertising, no politics. It was fun while it lasted > > but > > > it's turning into something semi-permanent now, I really have > significant > > > issues with this. > > > > this isnt advertising. > > > > what is your significant issue with the politics? > > > I'm so sick of everything being about politics, everything being > politicized, everything being presented about the end of the world, and > everything being pushed in my face and everyone being forced to > continuously pay attention, have an opinion and to care. > > Because it's just not true. It's just a spin. Sure, some things are > important. But the end of the world? Hardly. To put our reputation as a > prime, pristine, independent and unpartisan collection of multimedia tools > and experts on the line for an unlikely and minor moment of partisan gain > in a single country. Really? Why? I just don't get it. > > If you want to play politics, join a political movement or party, attend or > organize rallies, run for local, state or federal office, create a > politically motivated youtube channel or facebook group. But don't use our > website. > > My issue is this: this advertising turns FFmpeg into a political movement. > But I don't want FFmpeg to be a political movement, or to be political at > all. I would like FFmpeg to be an opensource (or free software) project > where people with various interests in multimedia can come together - > regardless of background - and create cool technical innovations. > > Ronald > +1
On Sun, 4 Mar 2018 09:45:03 -0500, "Ronald S. Bultje" <rsbultje@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 9:24 AM, Compn <tempn@mi.rr.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 06:59:45 -0500, "Ronald S. Bultje" > > <rsbultje@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Again, please: no advertising, no politics. It was fun while it lasted > > but > > > it's turning into something semi-permanent now, I really have significant > > > issues with this. > > > > this isnt advertising. > > > > what is your significant issue with the politics? > > > I'm so sick of everything being about politics, everything being > politicized, everything being presented about the end of the world, and > everything being pushed in my face and everyone being forced to > continuously pay attention, have an opinion and to care. > > Because it's just not true. It's just a spin. Sure, some things are > important. But the end of the world? Hardly. To put our reputation as whats your opinion on software patents? -compn
On Sun, Mar 4, 2018, at 5:45 AM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: > > I'm so sick of everything being about politics, everything being > politicized, everything being presented about the end of the world, and > everything being pushed in my face and everyone being forced to > continuously pay attention, have an opinion and to care. > > Because it's just not true. It's just a spin. Sure, some things are > important. But the end of the world? Hardly. To put our reputation as a > prime, pristine, independent and unpartisan collection of multimedia tools > and experts on the line for an unlikely and minor moment of partisan gain > in a single country. Really? Why? I just don't get it. > > If you want to play politics, join a political movement or party, attend or > organize rallies, run for local, state or federal office, create a > politically motivated youtube channel or facebook group. But don't use our > website. > > My issue is this: this advertising turns FFmpeg into a political movement. > But I don't want FFmpeg to be a political movement, or to be political at > all. I would like FFmpeg to be an opensource (or free software) project > where people with various interests in multimedia can come together - > regardless of background - and create cool technical innovations. > > Ronald +1 too. I began writing something along the same lines when I wrote my earlier reply but never finished and it was much less well written. I retract my acquiesced suggestion of a small banner. It was a compromise to try to find an acceptable solution to make everyone equally unhappy. FFmpeg should be apolitical. We have enough technical things to spend out time on and argue over. The majority do not want this thing on the website. I think this discussion should end here.
On Sun, 04 Mar 2018 16:40:55 +0000, Kieran Kunhya <kieran618@googlemail.com> wrote: > > +1 just you wait until net neutrality is really dead. your rival broadcast encoder vendors will pay the extra $5k and have your site slowed or de-listed from the internet, kieran. Then you can just pay the ISP $5k per year to get off the slow list. unless you think AT&T or Verizon will be fair. ffmpeg's reputation is based on its code. not its developers. not its website. not any of its activism or news entries. not any of us, not the mailing lists, not the irc, not the trac. or i could be wrong. any changes of internet policy are going to affect everyone in different ways. to ignore this is folly. -compn
On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Compn <tempn@mi.rr.com> wrote: > On Sun, 04 Mar 2018 16:40:55 +0000, Kieran Kunhya > <kieran618@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> >> +1 > > just you wait until net neutrality is really dead. your rival > broadcast encoder vendors will pay the extra $5k and have your site > slowed or de-listed from the internet, kieran. > > Then you can just pay the ISP $5k per year to get off the slow list. > > unless you think AT&T or Verizon will be fair. > > ffmpeg's reputation is based on its code. > not its developers. not its website. > not any of its activism or news entries. > not any of us, not the mailing lists, not the irc, not the trac. > > or i could be wrong. > any changes of internet policy are going to affect everyone in different > ways. to ignore this is folly. > Everyone is entitled to their opinion and their own politics, but you should also be respectful of those that do not want politics involved in FFmpeg. Its not the place for it. Do we add political statements about some internet-related happenings from other countries as well then? Why limit this to the US only? If we have one popup, we might as well have 5? Getting into politics is a slippery slope, and its best to just stay out of it. - Hendrik
On Sun, 4 Mar 2018 20:18:49 +0100, Hendrik Leppkes <h.leppkes@gmail.com> wrote: > Everyone is entitled to their opinion and their own politics, but you > should also be respectful of those that do not want politics involved > in FFmpeg. Its not the place for it. software patents directly affect ffmpeg, should we ignore that? I still have not seen an argument for why politics should not be involved on ffmpeg. only some strawman argument about kittens on youtube. > Do we add political statements about some internet-related happenings > from other countries as well then? Why limit this to the US only? If > we have one popup, we might as well have 5? no one limited our website statements to US-only. There have only been two statements by ffmpeg on non-ffmpeg internet items in the past 10+ years, looking at the news and archived news. http://ffmpeg.org/archive.html November 20, 2011 FFmpeg supports the fight against American Internet censorship. and then the widget we are discussing today. I see some people complaining about so much politics, but two posts in 10 years ? that is what you are upset about ? please help me understand your problem with this. Aside from these, which i think everyone is in agreement with. 1. popup ad is annoying , news entry would be better 2. no reason to have a popup page on the docs pages. i'm not trying to be dismissive, i want to understand. please explain the problem. also no one has said why net neutrality is political at all. its a technical problem, and ffmpeg is all about technical problems. ssl heartbleed was a technical problem that was also posted to our news page. i dont remember the vitriol about that ssl news post. -compn
On Sun, Mar 4, 2018, at 10:54 AM, Compn wrote: > > I still have not seen an argument for why politics should not be > involved on ffmpeg. only some strawman argument about kittens on > youtube. <https://lists.ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2018-March/226055.html>
On Sun, Mar 04, 2018 at 09:45:03AM -0500, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 9:24 AM, Compn <tempn@mi.rr.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 06:59:45 -0500, "Ronald S. Bultje" > > <rsbultje@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Again, please: no advertising, no politics. It was fun while it lasted > > but > > > it's turning into something semi-permanent now, I really have significant > > > issues with this. > > > > this isnt advertising. > > > > what is your significant issue with the politics? > > > I'm so sick of everything being about politics, everything being > politicized, everything being presented about the end of the world, and > everything being pushed in my face and everyone being forced to > continuously pay attention, have an opinion and to care. > > Because it's just not true. It's just a spin. Sure, some things are > important. But the end of the world? Hardly. To put our reputation as a > prime, pristine, independent and unpartisan collection of multimedia tools > and experts on the line for an unlikely and minor moment of partisan gain > in a single country. Really? Why? I just don't get it. > > If you want to play politics, join a political movement or party, attend or > organize rallies, run for local, state or federal office, create a > politically motivated youtube channel or facebook group. But don't use our > website. > > My issue is this: this advertising turns FFmpeg into a political movement. > But I don't want FFmpeg to be a political movement, or to be political at > all. I would like FFmpeg to be an opensource (or free software) project > where people with various interests in multimedia can come together - > regardless of background - and create cool technical innovations. After reading todays IRC backlog, i think i understand your position. And i agree with you that FFmpeg should not take sides in politics. Where i disagree is not that. I understand the disadvnatges here and i understood them long before. First lets try to investigate if this actually is a issue with a side that is against it. Because IIRC noone expressed opposition to net neutrality here or in fact in any other technical environment that i read except as "devils advocate". If i search for net neutrality poll 2018 on google and pick the 1st and 2nd links http://variety.com/2018/politics/news/net-neutrality-fcc-democrats-1202711864/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/12/12/this-poll-gave-americans-a-detailed-case-for-and-against-the-fccs-net-neutrality-plan-the-reaction-among-republicans-was-striking/ The first claims 72% of people claiming to understand net neutrality are in favor of it The second claims 83 percent of Americans do not approve of the FCC proposal. Just 16 percent said they approved. and "About one in five Republicans said they were in favor of the FCC's proposal." But the main reason why iam writing this mail is that the whole discussion seems to have missed a important point so far and that is By doing nothing at all, we take a political position as well. And its one that least represents us. The apolitical thing to do would be to write a apolitical news entry that informs our users about the facts, risks and arguments around net neutrality in relation to FFmpeg and multimedia. We also would tell our users if FFmpeg would become 5% slower or faster. We similarly should tell them about the use of FFmpeg in relation to network transmission in the future potentially costing x% more You want FFmpeg not to harm itself by taking side in politcal debate. I agree with this, it makes sense But i do not want us to be afraid to inform our users about things that could make their use of our tools more expensive or slower. My oppinion is that a news article should be written that everyone here is happy with. And that helps users better understand what effects net neutrality and its removial could have on them and multimedia and FFmpeg. That way they can better make an educated decission on what position to take if any. Or if they dont care they can just ignore the article, neither side would feel offended. And we would do the morally correct thing to inform our users about something that may affect their use of our software. Thanks [...]
On Sun, 4 Mar 2018 at 22:59 Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc> wrote: > On Sun, Mar 04, 2018 at 09:45:03AM -0500, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 9:24 AM, Compn <tempn@mi.rr.com> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 06:59:45 -0500, "Ronald S. Bultje" > > > <rsbultje@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Again, please: no advertising, no politics. It was fun while it > lasted > > > but > > > > it's turning into something semi-permanent now, I really have > significant > > > > issues with this. > > > > > > this isnt advertising. > > > > > > what is your significant issue with the politics? > > > > > > I'm so sick of everything being about politics, everything being > > politicized, everything being presented about the end of the world, and > > everything being pushed in my face and everyone being forced to > > continuously pay attention, have an opinion and to care. > > > > Because it's just not true. It's just a spin. Sure, some things are > > important. But the end of the world? Hardly. To put our reputation as a > > prime, pristine, independent and unpartisan collection of multimedia > tools > > and experts on the line for an unlikely and minor moment of partisan gain > > in a single country. Really? Why? I just don't get it. > > > > If you want to play politics, join a political movement or party, attend > or > > organize rallies, run for local, state or federal office, create a > > politically motivated youtube channel or facebook group. But don't use > our > > website. > > > > My issue is this: this advertising turns FFmpeg into a political > movement. > > But I don't want FFmpeg to be a political movement, or to be political at > > all. I would like FFmpeg to be an opensource (or free software) project > > where people with various interests in multimedia can come together - > > regardless of background - and create cool technical innovations. > > After reading todays IRC backlog, i think i understand your position. > And i agree with you that FFmpeg should not take sides in politics. > Where i disagree is not that. I understand the disadvnatges here and > i understood them long before. > > First lets try to investigate if this actually is a issue with a side > that is against it. Because IIRC noone expressed opposition to net > neutrality here or in fact in any other technical environment that i > read except as "devils advocate". > > If i search for net neutrality poll 2018 on google and pick > the 1st and 2nd links > > http://variety.com/2018/politics/news/net-neutrality-fcc-democrats-1202711864/ > > https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/12/12/this-poll-gave-americans-a-detailed-case-for-and-against-the-fccs-net-neutrality-plan-the-reaction-among-republicans-was-striking/ > > The first claims 72% of people claiming to understand net neutrality are > in favor of it > The second claims 83 percent of Americans do not approve of the FCC > proposal. Just 16 percent said they approved. > and "About one in five Republicans said they were in favor of the FCC's > proposal." > > But the main reason why iam writing this mail is that the whole discussion > seems to have missed a important point so far and that is > > By doing nothing at all, we take a political position as well. > And its one that least represents us. > > The apolitical thing to do would be to write a apolitical news entry that > informs our users about the facts, risks and arguments around net > neutrality > in relation to FFmpeg and multimedia. > > We also would tell our users if FFmpeg would become 5% slower or faster. > We similarly should tell them about the use of FFmpeg in relation to > network > transmission in the future potentially costing x% more > > You want FFmpeg not to harm itself by taking side in politcal debate. > I agree with this, it makes sense > > But i do not want us to be afraid to inform our users about things that > could make their use of our tools more expensive or slower. > > My oppinion is that a news article should be written that everyone here > is happy with. And that helps users better understand what effects > net neutrality and its removial could have on them and multimedia and > FFmpeg. > That way they can better make an educated decission on what position to > take > if any. Or if they dont care they can just ignore the article, neither side > would feel offended. And we would do the morally correct thing to inform > our users about something that may affect their use of our software. > > Thanks > > [...] > Ladies and Gentleman I present you exhibit A, Michael continues to argue so that people get bored of replying and he gets his way. This has never ever ever happened in the history of FFmpeg. Kieran
Kieran Kunhya (2018-03-05):
> Ladies and Gentleman I present you exhibit A, Michael
Wait, what? "exhibit"? When did this thread become a trial?
Regards,
diff --git a/src/template_head2 b/src/template_head2 index a0b11ab..71daf07 100644 --- a/src/template_head2 +++ b/src/template_head2 @@ -3,6 +3,29 @@ <script src="js/html5shiv.min.js"></script> <script src="js/respond.min.js"></script> <![endif]--> + <script type="text/javascript"> + var _bftn_options = { + /* + * Specify view cookie expiration. After initial view, modal will not be + * displayed to a user again until after this cookie expires. Defaults to one + * day. + */ + viewCookieExpires: 60, // @type {number} + + /* + * Specify action cookie expiration. After initiating a call or clicking a + * donate link, modal will not be displayed to a user again until after this + * cookie expires. Defaults to one week. + */ + actionCookieExpires: 60, // @type {number} + + /* + * Prevents the widget iframe from loading Google Analytics. Defaults to false. + */ + disableGoogleAnalytics: true, // @type {boolean} + }; + </script> + <script src="https://widget.battleforthenet.com/widget.js" async></script> <link href="main.rss" rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" title="ffmpeg.org" /> <link rel="shortcut icon" href="favicon.ico" />