From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 11 20:41:37 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F59F16A41A for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 20:41:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from oscartheduck@gmail.com) Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com (wr-out-0506.google.com [64.233.184.234]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26BDD13C461 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 20:41:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from oscartheduck@gmail.com) Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 68so4093497wri.3 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 12:41:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=fV/C0JKZ7GfTa59+gZYuwa5/o/3tnaYpEGA+iIKOhV0=; b=rhdtK8pc4X+0ymbB/ejhIXKdfA8f4uRvzipb07hMJqG/N75ICU36Q78tH8C089Du/j1AEVSzh89lkHdZgodYKh4MDc5BjUp/9oTuV0U2j133TVyAFcIYbPiS/nBCdtOfuU2oyraOU3kO3XgD2tAp8f/safQ4n4L1RiiqpEFmP+M= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Sm23wok0pG/IQiCncDLuVBL2/9vekIxPc3v61WoYPz/GemG/sfp/Emwov0S2ck1QYmGn6L3S19L8KI8SwfyMQ47cJZd3UjN+9rhlbHvs+P/pSzZNXYZtd/+CtGalBC2rnPRdo/OkOWSo+u1vnxi7lCrhW79i5wmq1rFYE3+2NG0= Received: by 10.142.126.17 with SMTP id y17mr367978wfc.170.1202762494948; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 12:41:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from pclmills.lanl.gov ( [69.254.137.131]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 30sm5059280wfc.6.2008.02.11.12.41.33 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 11 Feb 2008 12:41:34 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <47B0B30F.9020708@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 13:41:51 -0700 From: James User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Chuck Robey References: <47AFC80B.8090303@gmail.com> <47B05924.5000405@cs.okstate.edu> <47B05C7A.80602@pacific.net.sg> <200802111540.34420.wundram@beenic.net> <20080211161507.6e82fbd4@anthesphoria.net> <47B06A39.7090708@pacific.net.sg> <20080211210835.23c11096@anthesphoria.net> <20080211211052.X5691@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <47B0AF73.6030901@chuckr.org> In-Reply-To: <47B0AF73.6030901@chuckr.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Wojciech Puchar , questions@freebsd.org, "Heiko Wundram \(Beenic\)" Subject: Re: what happened to linuxflashplugin? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 20:41:37 -0000 Chuck Robey wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >>>> YouTube? Isn't the right spelling YouPorn? >>>> >>> No, it isn't. If you find nothing worth watching on *You*Tube, it >>> doesn't mean that others can't find interesting things. For example, I >>> find there a lot of good and difficult-to-find material from some fields >>> of art. >>> >> get this interestinf stuff down to your disk with youtube-dl, then watch >> with mplayer. >> >> at least you will have it on your disk, not download each time as >> youtube does everything to prevent caching the stuff. >> as it's exactly agains efficiency, they have a reason to do this. >> >> any explanations why? i think because then they are able to keep >> "control" on the stuff, being able to remove anything at will, with no >> copy on users computers. >> > > All you folks who are focussing on YouTube are (purposefully? I don't > know) the fact that with just about half of the entire Web using flash in > one way or antoehr, not using Flash is a huge problem, as anyone who > browses without a flashplayer knows. > > I dunno which license folks have been reading, This thread has gone on so > long, I can't keep track anymore, but I do know that the link I saw from > Adobe's site, referring to Flashplayer, doesn't mention (at all, even in > passing) either Linux OR FreeBSD. They do ask you know to modify it > (decompile, whatever) but there is an explicit loophole left, in order for > folks to be able to adapt it to run on their platform. > > As far as the complaint about distributing it, we have LOTS of software in > the same category, which seems to be possible for us to deal with, such as, > well, anyone ever heard of Sun's Java? If we can do Java, we can do the > flashplugin just the same. > > Someone has their dander up over licensing agreements (that's possible, I > get that way) and are purposely interpreting the license as evilly as they > can, but they are the one's who are preventing it from working on FreeBSD, > not Adobe. Yes, those licenses are a poor joke, but if you ask me, so is > Linux's. > > Jeeze, can't you find something more important to get upset about, like the > high price of beer? > I'm with you there. Of course, getting a decent beer in the US is a chore, too. I can't actually see the issue; the makefiles grab the files from wherever they're told to. If the only place listed to wget the flashplugin file from is adobe's site, then FreeBSD isn't a redistributor and we're within the terms of the license. James