Its turtles cats all the way down.

yea, a lot of open source projects are done by people that don’t see the point of copyleft software.
I think a lot of people just go with the 4 freedoms that RMS laid out. when I read devs’ reasons to use non-copyleft license, it boils down to “I don’t want to limit freedom of later devs even if those devs are gonna fork it and make it private”. even when they say “I don’t care” they mean the same.

and they have the right to see it that way. my thinking is that humanity used to not have copyright at all. and the reason we are not living in caves is that knowledge mostly was spread (even when going from father to son only).

so I think software needs to go that way as much as it can.
I understand that developing software needs money and I even understand patents to an extent. but shit gone mad and patents are gone crazy. android is THE shining prime example of what happens even with a company that at least pretended not to go this way (that was naive to think they wouldn’t)

that’s why I going to write any software I write (even though I am just starting programing) in the most copyleft license ever I find.
maybe even more stalman than gpl3.

btw is there any site that explains the practical diff between gpl2 and 3? not tldr but not in details either, just maybe explain case base what happens?

as I said in last post, I only see copyleft as a viable alternative. too many dev efforts forked and privatized. android should have been a warning. but many devs just think open source is enough. and they still think getting adapted by big corporation will not change the direction of projects.

I am personally going in the direction of testing and helping only copyleft projects. so I skipped RedoxOS. even-though I like rust and new microkernel OSes.

If I am going to give my time to a project (small as it is) I don’t want it to end up like android.

my hot take: while this is good for users in short term, in long term it just prolongs non-copyleft android OS hold for google.

my only hope for grapheneos is that they pointed that they may move from android too.

oh dont get me wrong. as I said I agree with most of your original (and now second post).

my gripe with grain was not about av1 per se. it was with movie makers that add it just because they think it is how movies should be

this is retarded to me: “Reasons to Keep Film Grain On: Artistic Effect: Film grain can add a nostalgic or artistic quality to video and photography, evoking a classic film look” because the reason is just “nostalgic” that the director has, as in if he was born after digital era, he would have an issue with it and not add it (usually).

about h264 and transparency, the issue is not that h264 can get that but at high bitrate, the issue is that av1 (as I read) can’t get it at any bitrate.

but overall I agree with you.

I even recently was shocked to see how much faster av1 encoding has gotten. I would have thought it was still orders of magnitude, but with some setting (like x265 slow setting) av1 is has the same encoding speed.

I want to agree with you and I do to a large extend. I like new codecs and having more opensourcy coded is better than using a codec that has many patents. long term patents(current situation) slows technological progress.

what I don’t agree with you is some details.

first, Netflix youtube and so on need low bitrate and they (specially google/youtube) don’t care that much about quality. google youtube video are really bit starved for their resolutions. netflix is a bit better.

second, many people when they discuss codecs they are referring to a different use case for them. they are talking about archiving. as in, the best quality codec at a same size. so they compare original (raw video, no lossy codec used) with encoded ones. their conclusion is that av1 is great for size reduction, but cant beat h264 for fidelity at any size. I think that h264 has a placebo or transparent profile but av1 doesn’t.

so when I download a fi…I mean a linux ISO from torrents, I usually go for newest codec. but recently I don’t go for the smallest size because it takes away from details in the picture.

but if I want to archive a movie (that I like a lot, which is rare) I get the bigger h264 (or if uhd blueray h265).

third: a lot of people’s idea of codec quality is formed based on downloading or streaming other people’s encoded videos and they themself don’t compare the quality (as they don’t have time or a good raw video to compare).

4th: I have heard av1 has issues with film grain, as in it removes them. film grain is an artifact of physical films (non-digital) that unfortunately many directors try (or used to) to duplicate because they grew up watching movies on films and think that movies should be like so they add them in in post production. even though it is literally a defect and even human eyes doesn’t duplicate it so it is not even natural. but this still is a bug of av1 (if I read correctly) because codec should go for high fidelity and not high smoothness.

you didn’t do the wrong thing.

what many people don’t notice is that support for a codec in gpu(in hardware) is two part. one is decoding and one is encoding.

for quality video nobody does hardware encoding (at least not on consumer systems linux this 3050 nvidia)

for most users the important this is hardware support for decoding so that they can watch their 4k movie with no issue.

so you are in the clear.

you can watch av1 right now and when av2 becomes popular enough to be used in at least 4 years from now.

maybe, maybe not.

when h264 was introduced (Aug 2004), even intel had HW encoding for it with sandybridge in 2011. nvidia had at 2012

so less than 7 years.

av1 was first introduced 7 years ago and for at least two years android TVs require HW decoding for it.

And AMD rdna2 had the same 4 years ago.

so from introduction to hardware decoding it took 3 years.

I have no idea why 10 years is thrown around.

and av1 had to compete with h264 and h265 both. ( they had to decide if it was worth implementing it)

if you mean the most secure desktop? then linux is not. not by a long shot. use windows.

https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/security-privacy-advice.html#desktop-os

https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/linux.html

if you mean most most free, linux it is. personally I use linux.

I don’t think that is how it works. For example I don’t think you can get google security update for older android without updating the whole system. there were monthly google security update that are going to become less frequent.

Also I think the part that stops the apk installation (those not signed with signature in google database) are checked by google play services and that is installed in background which is the result of project treble and mainline that google implemented for modular updates without rom update. so you probably can’t stop google from doing this policy even if you stay on older ROMs.