[MEncoder-users] Flashvideo for YouTube using mencoder

[Phil Ehrens]

Rich Felker wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 07:10:17PM +0100, Nicolas George wrote:
> > L'octidi 8 ventôse, an CCXVI, Phil Ehrens a écrit :
> > > Certainly, it could be 100% spatially accurate, but it will
> > > still be *temporally* inaccurate,
> > 
> > I insist: if there are two consecutive identical frames, then, unless the
> > codec stupidly decides to make the second one an I-frame, the second one has
> > exactly the same quality as the first one at the cost of exactly 0 bits.
> > 
> > >				    because there is no actual
> > > data representing the timeslice for that frame.
> > 
> > I am not quite sure what you mean here. There is no data for the frame, but
> > there is for the timeslice: either by the multiplexer format of by the
> > timestamp of the next frame, the decoding system knows there is a frame
> > without bits here.
> 
> This guy is just an idiot who speaks with magical terms which he does
> not understand. It's like the morons who think solid gold speaker
> cables give their digital audio "more body" or "better color". They
> can't be reasoned with because they talk with terms that have no
> meaning; that's the case with "*temporally* inaccurate" here. I
> suggest we just ban the moron from the list after the next idiotic
> post of this type.
> 
> And to Phil: if you want to discuss, you must DEFINE any term you want
> to use that otherwise seems nonsensical. But I think all you want to
> do is troll and continue claiming you're right about a topic you
> obviously know NOTHING about.

Geez. And here I thought I was explaining why P-frame size didn't
matter. Oh well...