[Foundation-l] Format Conversion

Mon Jan 21 18:48:58 UTC 2008

I dont think Erik said that youtube hoists only educational content, or is
specialized in it.
I think he intended to say that it '''also''' hosts tons of educational
content. The fact that flickr has tons of CC-BY-SA photos does not mean that
it has only free content.

There are many shades of grey between black and white. This also applies to
file formats. A pragmatic approach, where we convert stuff on upload into a
free format is something i asked for in vain at commons. I am very glad to
see resurface that idea here.

I also agree that java is widely installed, and offers a potential base, but
had the disadvantage of being slow. Is there a solution possible in
cooperation with the theora / ogg people? Some solution where FF users
automatically a non javascript plugin fast and easy, while IE users fall
backon slow java?

2008/1/21, Ivo Emanuel Gonçalves <justivo at gmail.com>:
>
> On 1/21/08, Erik Moeller erik at wikimedia.org wrote:
> > It's worth noting that video on the web was viable for millions of
> > users long before YouTube -- the YouTube success story is not
> > one of bandwidth, but of usability.
>
> I'm afraid to disagree with you.  It's the bandwidth that made it
> possible to create a site where anyone would be able to upload a
> video, no matter how crappy, stupid, or idiotic it may be.  And that
> drove in the (mindless) crowds.  For instance DivX's Stage6, which
> only uses DivX not Flash, is popular, but it only showed up about the
> same time YouTube did.  Again, because of the bandwidth.  Me, I can't
> play any video on Stage6 and YouTube tends to occasionally crash my
> browser.  I wouldn't say my experience on its usability has been
> favorable, though I do agree that without some usability YouTube
> wouldn't go anywhere.
>
> > Before Flash players became widespread, playing video on
> > the web was a constant hassle: one would struggle with Real Player,
> > Quicktime, Windows Media Player, etc., and an additional number of
> > specialized plugins, all of course proprietary.
>
> Flash players have been widepsread for a while.  Ever heard of a
> little corner on the web called Newgrounds?  It's been around since
> what, 1999?  Yeah, it does help to have one single plugin that seems
> to play everything, but it's not the sole reason why it has become
> popular.  The wisdom of the crowds, or something of that sort.  You'll
> also note that all those other plugins you mentioned have always had
> problems working on different systems.
>
> I believe that some benign entity, perhaps, Wikimedia Foundation
> should sponsor two projects: an online transcoding backend to Ogg
> Video and an actual plugin akin to the Flash Player.  The Xiph Player
> if you will.  The backend would be most useful for the Wikimedia
> projects, while the player would in theory be the right fix until
> every browser learns the <video> tag which would help both the
> Wikimedia projects and other initiatives willing to promote free video
> AKA Open Media.
>
> And why doesn't anyone do an Ogg Video player based on the torrent
> protocol?  Like what Azureus is doing now?  That's because people are
> content with what they have and don't think of the future like Gregory
> Maxwell mentioned on an earlier message.
>
> > Whether one believe's Adobe's numbers of 98%+ adoption of Flash in
> > "mature markets" (as opposed to 84.6% for Java) [1], YouTube and its
> > clones made it ridiculously easy for millions of people to view video
> > on the web who couldn't before.
>
> Again, the argument is bandwidth.  Try getting a time machine and--
> no, wait, are you outside Europe?  Just get a 56k line and try
> watching terabytes of video.  Oh, it doesn't work does it?  So much
> for Flash to take away all those problems.
>
> > My fear is that by locking ourselves into Ogg Theora only, we are
> > replicating the pre-YouTube experience of video that may or may not
> > work, may or may not require installation of additional plugins, etc.
>
> This is a transitional phase.  Prophecy tells of a hero of distant
> land and unknown past whom will come forth to save the world from the
> evils of bad usability.  Or rather someone will understand that this
> situation is not optimal and will actually DO something to fix it.
>
> > I suspect that the only effect a completely purist stance will have is
> > simply that people will go elsewhere for video educational content.
>
> Where?  YouTube?  You gotta be kidding me.  Here's a sample of
> educational concent from YouTube:
>
> "LOL WAKE UP SHEPPLE"
>
> "omg that cat iz sooooooooooooo cutteeee~"
>
> "wow shes hot!!!!"
>
> "NINELEVEN WAS AN INSIDE JOB!  WAKE UP SHEPPLE!"
>
> > If Ogg Theora is the future, then choosing parallel distribution now
> > on a site that is not a significant source of video educational
> > content will have no negative impact.
>
> Oh, it is my friend.  You see, humans are creatures of habit.  You
> teach them to use this parallel distribution method, and they won't
> turn away for "the future" any time soon.  The future is now.  If one
> wants to make it work, one has to go and actually do work to make it
> as easier to use for the crowds as possible, IF that's what you deem
> to be the obstacle.
>
> Me, I think people just don't care about educational content, which
> perhaps would explain why for instance Wikipedia has an article for
> every one of the 500-something Pokemon's as well as an article about
> Star Wars lightsabers being vastly more worked than biographies of
> people who did some of the biggest discoveries of their age.  Heck, it
> won't stop me from trying to make Wikipedia the best encyclopedia in
> the world, but I am one of the _few_, not the majority.
>
> Mr Erik, help Wikimedia go in the right direction.  No backpeddling,
> please.
>
> -Ivo
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>