Standard mail for Flash Website providers ?
Hi all,
please forgive if this question was rised before:
Wouldn't a standard e-mail make sense which we (we as Linux users) can sent to Flash-only websites ?
Something to encourage them to either use fully open standards (e.g. WebM) or at least providing a non-flash based distribution of videos ?
I mean something like:
------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear website operator,
you are currently provides your content solely via non-free software (Adobe Flash). This restricts access for users which run completely free Linux distribution. Flash has a proven record with lots of vulnerabilities. Also Flash support of alternative operating systems tends to fade.
Please consider using open standards like WebM for providing content:
http://www.webmproject.org/
If using open compression codecs is not an option for you, then please consider at least providing your content via an open player component such as the Open Standard Media Player (OSM):
http://www.mediafront.org/project/osmplayer
Thank you for your support !
Best regards,
xxxx
------------------------------------------------------------------
Suggestions ? Thoughts ?
- Holger
It's much better for people to write their own messages. If people are seeing the same message over and over it's easy to ignore and/or lose interest.
Please, call the operating system GNU/Linux (and not Linux, which is its
kernel only). Yes, it does matter.
I think your message is a starting point and written well because:
-you point out issues
-you tell to whom and how does maintainers decisions affect on potential
visitors
-you give suggestions to fix them.
provides -> providing ;)
-It affects also other communities than the Free Software Community. I mean
the users of software, which doesn't have a flash implementation (yet).
I also second to jxself's point, one should indeed write in their own words,
so the response would be something else than pure ignorance. "oh, it's this
spam again".
Thanks for all the feedback !
True, a uniform mail might be rated as "spam" or simply be ignored although I
doubt that a provider who receives multiple mails in regard to dropping flash
will pay more attention if they are written in a more non-uniform way.
@Magic Banana: True, thanks for pointing out ! I am aware of GNU/Linux (= OS)
versus Linux (= Kernel) but at least in my country (Germany) the word Linux
simply equals the operating system. You will mostly never find GNU/Linux
written somewhere even at specific webpages. Often you can be happy if people
know the meaning of Linux at all: "Oh yeah...Linux...isn't this the free
operating system ?" :)
So bear with me when I did not write GNU/Linux.
While you are at it, can you send a letter to Disney and Nickelodeon? I'm
kinda getting sick of them encouraging kids to go to their websites with
Flash and Unity Web Player pretty much the only way to interact and play
games. Blarg.
Please, call the operating system GNU/Linux (and not Linux, which is its kernel only). Yes, it does matter.
I think your message is a starting point and written well because:
-you point out issues
-you tell to whom and how does maintainers decisions affect on potential visitors
-you give suggestions to fix them.
provides -> providing ;)
-It affects also other communities than the Free Software Community. I mean the users of software, which doesn't have a flash implementation (yet).
I also second to jxself's point, one should indeed write in their own words, so the response would be something else than pure ignorance. "oh, it's this spam again".
Thanks for all the feedback !
True, a uniform mail might be rated as "spam" or simply be ignored although I doubt that a provider who receives multiple mails in regard to dropping flash will pay more attention if they are written in a more non-uniform way.
@Magic Banana: True, thanks for pointing out ! I am aware of GNU/Linux (= OS) versus Linux (= Kernel) but at least in my country (Germany) the word Linux simply equals the operating system. You will mostly never find GNU/Linux written somewhere even at specific webpages. Often you can be happy if people know the meaning of Linux at all: "Oh yeah...Linux...isn't this the free operating system ?" :)
So bear with me when I did not write GNU/Linux.
While you are at it, can you send a letter to Disney and Nickelodeon? I'm kinda getting sick of them encouraging kids to go to their websites with Flash and Unity Web Player pretty much the only way to interact and play games. Blarg.
Oh and with the GNU/Linux and Linux discussion again.... what percentage of Ubuntu would you actually say is GNU software? Maybe 10% these days? I'm not talking about the GPL license but software that is considered under the GNU umbrella.
And what percentage is Linux? Maybe ten times less? Without even talking about the historical significance of the GNU project. Any sensible metric you can think of, GNU will be found more important than Linux.
Well not trying to start a flame war, but calling a distro GNU/Linux is like naming a final project after the tools that were used to make it. It's like naming a car Craftsman/Camaro because Chevy used Craftsman tools to build the car and it may have Craftsman parts inside it. It's kinda pretentious on the GNU camp to try to enforce that naming convention when even Linus doesn't agree to the GNU/Linux name.
So with that train of thought the package should just be what it is... Ubuntu or Debian.
How does one setup a kill file for a web forum?
How does one setup a kill file for a web forum?
Linus Torvalds currently takes the credit for the whole operating system. He obviously prefers his ego to the truth. The truth is the *operating system*, which was announced about 10 years before Linux was started, is called "GNU". This is the name of the operating system and not of a component or of a tool. To give credit to Linus Torvalds, at the origin of the most important contribution, the FSF appends "/Linux" to the name. Who is pretentious?
Well since the kernel is Linux and calling Ubuntu a Linux based OS is like saying Windows is NT based or OSX is BSD based. Maybe that's why people (Linus included) simply just use the Linux name. I am aware that GNU preceeded the Linux kernel but GNU served as tools for the future OS and the GNU camp should be thankful for Linux because Hurd dragged its feet. Hurd would have been a complete GNU based OS and worthy of the GNU/ connection. The GNU namesake tied to Linux is still highly debatable and subjective to this day.
Well since the kernel is Linux and calling Ubuntu a Linux based OS is like saying Windows is NT based or OSX is BSD based. Maybe that's why people (Linus included) simply just use the Linux name. [...]
Hm, perhaps that's why they say "NT" and "BSD" instead of Windows and OSX, too. Stupid.
"Ubuntu" is not only that, it's a *redistribution* of GNU+Linux allowed by their licenses -- which were created by Stallman and, later, FSF!! Windows and OSX are not redistributed, their developers chose to not allow it. The question does not resume itself to one or another technological reason. Nevertheless, lets proceed...
[...] GNU served as tools for the future OS [...]
AFAIK, this "future" OS is GNU/Linux. GNU didn't turn itself onto a mere tool of it, but it's its own main constitution, running on top of another necessary one.
[...] the GNU camp should be thankful for Linux [...]
Did you read what Magic Banana wrote right before you? See, again: To give credit to Linus Torvalds, at the origin of the most important contribution, the FSF appends "/Linux" to the name. Who is pretentious?
If you have difficult in reading, try writing each letter to a paper and consulting a dictionary. You could also ask your parents/teachers where the hell they were when you learned to read.
[...] Hurd would have been a complete GNU based OS and worthy of the GNU/ connection. [...]
Hm, no. There would be no need of appending "/$KERNEL" to "GNU", since Hurd and Mach are already from the GNU project. "/Linux" is appended because it isn't. Where the hell did you learn such diabolic logic? That's trying to rewrite the past.
[...] The GNU namesake tied to Linux is still highly debatable and subjective to this day.
You are inverting the whole thing. "/Linux" is tied to "GNU", not the contrary. That's both historically and logically correct. Besides: when applied to very objective matters (did you ever read FSF statements on that? You appear to listen to nobody), like the correct naming of things according to their reality, "this matter is highly debatable and subjective" is only a subterfuge designated to weak the listener. Again: shame on you.
Sir, you are a hoot.
The deaf increases the volume to shut up words.
With some more efforts, you will become the anti-Beethoven.
I'm not deaf, just more open minded than you. Hurts doesn't it?
EDIT: I've wanted to quote this earlier from a user comment about Stallman and the FSF mentality and why neither Linus or Stallman are the absolute authorities on software:
"I think extremists such as Stallman who practice intellectual sleight of hand through the dishonest selection of words in order to manipulate emotions do a great disservice to discourse. His goal is to obfuscate others into submission, comforted by his personal conviction that he is right, regardless of the means employed to achieve his goal. And since he knows better, he is convinced he should choose for those whose principles or ideas may not conform to his own."
Open minded? You don't even consider FSF statements on that, you don't read what others write (as in that case with what Magic Banana wrote; you just pretended not to hear it, as you do with everything people say to you in this matter); instead of going after the truth and trying to understand reality, instead of putting your own believes (or mere "words") into doubt for the sufficient time to improve your knowledge, instead of really answering what they said -- mainly when refuting what you said --, you prefer to be deaf and make use of distracting psychological subterfuges and sometimes personal "attacks" and "challenges" to not hear nothing and to weak whoever you can weak. I don't know if you are more stupid or more bad. It's called "ideology", in the bad meaning.
Now that I called your attention to what you do and inevitably to what you are, you are trying to concentrate the audience's (and your?) attention on another persons (the writer and who he mentions), trying to get rid, at least rhetorically, of your responsibility for what you do, say and for yourself -- I really think you are ashamed: it's impossible to be absolutely malicious. Also, doing that, you have the possibility of being interpreted as a moderated good boy, which can be good to your reputation -- but you do it remaining the same, being deaf and trying to offend other people in the way!
I'll be honest with you... I'm more concerned about open standards because even though programs like Microsoft Office exist, the push for them to adopt formats like OpenDocument is more important than actually getting the code to Office. If the end results are the same and I can open up a document 10 years from now with proprietary or free software, then everyone wins. There will be no end to proprietary software but it is essential the big companies play along.
As for Trisquel, I love it because not only is it one of the best looking operating systems, it educates its users in looking for free alternatives. In the past I was.stuck with Adobe products but learned to use free alternatives like Eclipse and OpenJDK instead. I'm no artist, but I have a mini goal for myself to help test Unity for Trisquel 6. That is because I believe in it and we are all on the same team.
I'll be honest with you... I'm more concerned about open standards [...]
Damn, what have open standards to do with the present matter? Why are you trying to bring them to discussion? I'm not talking about your points of view (I did it before, and they didn't resist to analysis), but about your attitude.
[...] because even though programs like Microsoft Office exist, the push for them to adopt formats like OpenDocument is more important [...]
That push is a push to make a privative software comply to open standards. It's not to promote Free Software, which is the present matter, by the way -- in case you didn't notice it.
[...] than actually getting the code to Office. [...]
Well, we have LibreOffice, we don't need Microsoft Office. People only need it, surprisingly... to open Microsoft's formats!!, which, surprisingly again... can't be opened with total success in LibreOffice and other FaiF software. Do you see how you bite your own tail?
[...] If the end results are the same [...]
Hm, no: by definition, they aren't. See, you even can't take Free Software into consideration. You don't care about it.
[...] and I can open up a document 10 years from now with proprietary or free software, then everyone wins. [...]
Indeed. Everyone but (1) you, because you will necessarily be within some contractual relationship with the distributor of the proprietary software you use, from which you would be easily dispensed if there were Free Software which fitted your purpose (it provides much better contracts than the proprietary ones) and (2) the people who were prejudiced by the perpetuation in society of this type of contractual relationship, of which you are a moral accomplice. This second group is very big, isn't it? 99% of it are constituted by people who even don't think about contracts. That's selling sweets to children after asking them to put their names on a paper...
[...] There will be no end to proprietary software [...]
Nostradamus reloaded: the (o)mission.
[...] but it is essential the big companies play along.
Another phrase fluctuating in the atmosphere. And, well, we want them to play with the same goals and under the same rules, don't we? Why have your friends suddenly appeared playing on the other side of the force?
As for Trisquel, I love it [...]
That's you problem. I'm talking about other things. Though I love it too.
[...] because not only *is it one of the best looking operating systems*, [...]
Hm, I love Trisquel because it made a compromise to be 100% Free as in Freedom. Then the other reasons come, accidental ones. So, by comparing our principles, we appear to *not* be on the same team.
[...] it educates its users in looking for free *alternatives*. In the past I was.stuck with Adobe products but learned to use free *alternatives* like Eclipse and OpenJDK instead. [...]
"Learn to use free alternatives" sounds good, but (1) is an accidental consequence of learning what is Free Software, gaining responsibility for what you do and then committing yourself to Free Software and (2) is misleading: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Alternative
----------------
We don't present free software as an "alternative", because it presents a goal of having free software alongside proprietary software. That presupposes that proprietary software is legitimate.
We believe that the only ethical way to distribute software is as free software. Thus, we aim to make free software more than an alternative. Our goal is a world where all programs are free, so that all their users are free.
----------------
[...] I'm no artist, but I have a mini goal for myself to help test Unity for Trisquel 6. That is because I believe in it and we are all on the same team.
Well, helping at the development is fine, thank you. But that seems you can't get the difference between essence and accident (translating directly from pt_BR, which are the technical terms in English?), nor between goals and ways (idem), or ideals and strategy. That doesn't make us to "play at the same team."
With that response, you would assume I just killed, f*cked, and ate your dog and made you watch while hog tied with a ball gag.
Take a deep breath. You will feel better.
-- automatically duplicated message --
-- automatically duplicated message --
I'll be honest with you... I'm more concerned about open standards because
even though programs like Microsoft Office exist, the push for them to adopt
formats like OpenDocument is more important than actually getting the code to
Office. If the end results are the same and I can open up a document 10 years
from now with proprietary or free software, then everyone wins. There will be
no end to proprietary software but it is essential the big companies play
along.
As for Trisquel, I love it because not only is it one of the best looking
operating systems, it educates its users in looking for free alternatives. In
the past I was.stuck with Adobe products but learned to use free alternatives
like Eclipse and OpenJDK instead. I'm no artist, but I have a mini goal for
myself to help test Unity for Trisquel 6. That is because I believe in it and
we are all on the same team.
-- automatically duplicated message --
.
-- automatically duplicated messages --
.
-- automatically duplicated message --
Well since the kernel is Linux and calling Ubuntu a Linux based OS is like
saying Windows is NT based or OSX is BSD based. Maybe that's why people
(Linus included) simply just use the Linux name. I am aware that GNU
preceeded the Linux kernel but GNU served as tools for the future OS and the
GNU camp should be thankful for Linux because Hurd dragged its feet. Hurd
would have been a complete GNU based OS and worthy of the GNU/ connection.
The GNU namesake tied to Linux is still highly debatable and subjective to
this day.
Linus Torvalds currently takes the credit for the whole operating system. He
obviously prefers his ego to the truth. The truth is the *operating system*,
which was announced about 10 years before Linux was started, is called "GNU".
This is the name of the operating system and not of a component or of a tool.
To give credit to Linus Torvalds, at the origin of the most important
contribution, the FSF appends "/Linux" to the name. Who is pretentious?
Well not trying to start a flame war, but calling a distro GNU/Linux is like
naming a final project after the tools that were used to make it. It's like
naming a car Craftsman/Camero because Chevy used Craftsman tools to build the
car and it may have Craftsman parts inside it. It's kinda pretentious on the
GNU camp to try to enforce that naming convention when even Linus doesn't
agree to the GNU/Linux name.
And what percentage is Linux? Maybe ten times less? Without even talking
about the historical significance of the GNU project. Any sensible metric you
can think of, GNU will be found more important than Linux.
@t3g:
I am not really some sort of mailing agent. Everyone should consider sending a mail himself to his favourite websites if they do not provide content in a "non-flash" form.
But in general I agree....Kids should not be grown up with primary contact to propritary stuff only. It is the same in schools running Windows on their PCs. For me the balance counts. My daughter has/will learn how to work with a Linux box for daily use but we also just bought her a XBox360 for birthday. IMO it is more valuable if kids grow up with "both sides of the coin" (so to speak) and understand the implication rather limited access to one or the other side of the fence.
>Oh and with the GNU/Linux and Linux discussion again...
There is no GNU/Linux vs. Linux discussion here. It is simply not the place. For content providers it does bot matter if I write GNU/Linux or Linux if I ask them to support more open technology.
In the end requesting such things might be pointless but I will at least try to ask.
I agree what you are saying about both sides of the coin. The people here ripped into me for accepting proprietary software for games while everything else I use is free software. Honestly I don't mind playing games on a proprietary console and its software because they are just games. Tools like c compilers and web browsers and office suites need to be free software because they are necessary for the current and future progression of computing.
Unfortunately with the people here it is 100% or nothing without exceptions. No grey areas at all. That is why there is open source viewpoints that clash with free software viewpoints.
Of course with these games being on the web with Disney, people are denied the right to view content when they are misled to think they could. At least with a game console people know what to expect and works as advertised.
"They are just game" but they include software (their "art" is another story and being unable to modify it does not threaten my freedom). Maybe this software spies on its users. Maybe it opens a backdoor to their systems. Often it tries to restrict the users through DRMs. Usually, it does not allow any player to hand up a copy to their friends. Etc.
I'm worried a little about next generation consoles because the rumors are that Microsoft and Sony are trying to ban used game sales with some DRM technique in the systems synching with an online account that requires you to be online all the time. I suppose this is a transitional technology before games go totally digital and we are screwed. I don't buy used games but like having a physical copy and can sell or lend to a friend if I want.
When that happens I've considered "growing up" and moving away from gaming or sticking to classic systems.
I'm worried a little about next generation consoles because the rumors are
that Microsoft and Sony are trying to ban used game sales with some DRM
technique in the systems synching with an online account that requires you to
be online all the time. I suppose this is a transitional technology before
games go totally digital and we are screwed. I don't buy used games but like
having a physical copy and can sell or lend to a friend if I want.
When that happens I've considered "growing up" and moving away from gaming or
sticking to classic systems.
"They are just game" but they include software (their "art" is another story
and being unable to modify it does not threaten my freedom). Maybe this
software spies on its users. Maybe it opens a backdoor to their systems.
Often it tries to restrict the users through DRMs. Usually, it does not allow
any player to hand up a copy to their friends. Etc.
.
Well, sending such letters is very good. But...
There is no GNU/Linux vs. Linux discussion here. It is simply not the place. [...]
Yes, there is a discussion, and it is the place for that. Name it GNU/Linux, which is the correct name for it -- unless, of course, you were trying to run Flash on top of Linux without GNU, which I think is NOT the case here.
[...] For content providers it does bot matter if I write GNU/Linux or Linux if I ask them to support more open technology.
Naming things accordingly to their reality is a "mere" question of being human. It's loving God above all else, it's loving wisdom*. It's NOT subordinated to those "pragmaticalistic" matters. And, well, if you use the name the enemy wants you to use, you lost the war -- even if you won some specific battles.
* translating from pt_BR; I'm referring to the First Commandment and to "philosophy" meaning. Love to God is love to Reality, and not to Caesar's preferences. I think you will easily understand the thing, I'll not need to sit down with you and explain everything. I hope...
-- automatically duplicated message --
I am not really some sort of mailing agent. Everyone should consider sending
a mail himself to his favourite websites if they do not provide content in a
"non-flash" form.
But in general I agree....Kids should not be grown up with primary contact to
propritary stuff only. It is the same in schools running Windows on their
PCs. For me the balance counts. My daughter has/will learn how to work with a
Linux box for daily use but we also just bought her a XBox360 for birthday.
IMO it is more valuable if kids grow up with "both sides of the coin" (so to
speak) and understand the implication rather limited access to one or the
other side of the fence.
>Oh and with the GNU/Linux and Linux discussion again...
There is no GNU/Linux vs. Linux discussion here. It is simply not the place.
For content providers it does bot matter if I write GNU/Linux or Linux if I
ask them to support more open technology.
In the end requesting such things might be pointless but I will at least try
to ask.