[FFmpeg-cvslog] r22954 - in trunk: configure libavcodec/audioconvert.c libavutil/libm.h

[Michael Niedermayer]

On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 03:35:06PM +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> writes:
> 
> > On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 02:33:16AM +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> >> Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> writes:
> >> 
> >> > On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 09:31:05PM +0400, Michael Kostylev wrote:
> >> >> 
> >> >> On Fri Apr 23 18:28:10 2010
> >> >> mru wrote:
> >> >> 
> >> >> > Workaround for missing llrintf()
> >> >> 
> >> >> Thanks. FATE will be back after restoring of dumb terminal support.
> >> >
> >> > now if only fate wouldnt depend on google scripts then i would know
> >> 
> >> Seriously, how paranoid can a person be?
> >
> > Would you (assuming it did not cost you any time) inform google every time
> > you read a page in a newspaper that you do that now and also what
> > newspaper/playboy magazin/book you read before that?
> 
> If you subscribe to a paper magazine, the publisher knows exactly
> which issues I receive.  They also know if I subscribe to other
> magazines from the same publisher.  They also know where I live.  They
> will use that information when selling space to advertisers.
> 
> Not much difference, really.

Theres a huge difference
Your postman also knows from whom you receive when something, thats because
he has to deliver it. Similarly the publisher knows what you subscribed from
his magazins because he needs to know this to send the magazins to you.

google OTOH collects such information without them being in any way in
the chain of people who need the information and they do so at a large
systematic scale.
The difference is like the difference between a photographer who your
daughter hired to take erotic pictures of her vs. a photographer who climbs
up trees and takes pictures of people in their bathrooms or bedrooms and
does so systematically and without their consent or knowledge. And he is
going to attempt to make profit from these pictures.



> 
> > If no why is that considered all ok on the web?
> > Noone would be called paranoid if they refused to tell a random company
> > who is probably going to sell that info one way or another about what
> > they privately read, where they do and when.
> 
> I don't care in the slightest if google knows each time I look at the
> FATE page.

id suspect googles scripts are used by more pages than fate

[...]
-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

There will always be a question for which you do not know the correct awnser.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-cvslog/attachments/20100424/aca466b9/attachment.pgp>