Re: [autonomo.us] FSF is hiring: outreach and communication coordinator

[Hubert Figuière]

On 01/05/13 01:55 PM, Danyl Strype wrote:

>>
>> If that does not look like a Google+ requirement, then I wonder.
>>
> 
> All Google services work under a unified login (inc. YouTube etc). If you
> got one prior to G+ launch, especially through Gmail, which integrates
> Hangouts as part of the built-in GChat client, the 'real name' policy isn't
> enforced. That doesn't solve the proprietary plug-in problem though. I note
> your skepticism, but I'm confident

No. That's not true either. Google+ is just the next level. They ask for
a Google+ account. I don't have one anymore since they blackmailed me.
Yet I still have access to stuff non Google+

NOTE: had I not deleted my G+ account they would have blocked everything
else like they did to other. In short Google Account ISN'T G+ Account.
G+ Account IS a Google Account

> 
>>  We have seen Google promising and not delivering. Like dropping H264
>> support in Chrome - to push WebM.
> 
> 
> I agree that not providing support for WebM would be a case of not
> delivering. I'm not so sure discontinuing support for an open standard,
> even a patent-encumbered one like H264, would deliver anything of value at

This is slightly OT, but reading of the 3 lines above I believe you
don't know what I'm talking about.

I was just outlined that Google have in the past promised and then not
delivered.


[...]
>> Or switching Youtube to HTML5 (still largely partial). Etc.
>>
> 
> AFAIK YouTube is fully HTML5 compliant. 

Remove Flash. Go to Youtube. Count how many video needs to Flash. *hint*
the same one, *embedded* on a third party page work without Flash.



> Until all the major browsers have
> sufficiently stable HTML support, they can't drop Flash, much as they might
> like to, for the same reasons given above. Flash as a defacto standard is
> going the way of RealMedia, even Adobe is quietly accepting that and
> dropping support for it left right and centre, and its about time. The
> transition isn't complete yet though, and YouTube would be foolish to jump
> the gun.

Exhibit 2 of the above.

Again this was just another example of Google underdelivering. But their
competition has been far worse to that respect.

>> Sadly WebRTC isn't quite ready yet,
> 
> 
> That's not what the many businesses now using it think:
> http://www.nojitter.com/post/240145963/why-google-hangout-adoption-of-webrtc-is-irrelevant

Let's answer one question: is WebRTC available in the *released* version
of Firefox (currently 20) and Chrome (no idea which it is these days) ?

If you answer no to either, then you just confirmed what I was saying.

Also reading the article you linked, they actually don't talk about
implementing WebRTC since H264 isn't part of WebRTC, but rather some
superset that is not free for anyone to implement.

But this thread is slide off-topic.



Hub