kinetik

Assuming a single machine (which is obviously not true, but I can't find any details about the size of the render farm), that'd mean the entire film would take something like two hundred and thirty seven years to render.

Also, note that the WSJ article you linked to is talking about Toy Story 3D which is a re-rendering of the original film in stereoscopic 3D.

Chrome/Chromium and Opera also support Ogg Theora/Vorbis out of the box.

How'd you come up with the cycle counts? I'm new to GLSL, so any documentation beyond the spec would be super useful to me.

Both "RSA Security 1024 V3" and "RSA Security 2048 V3" are shown as valid in Apple's System Roots.

Microsoft's list includes "RSA Security 2048 V3", but not "RSA Security 1024 V3".

I'm glad there's more transparency about what is added to the NSS certificate store nowadays.

The "special Flash updater" detects if the user has Flash installed and is out of date, and only if so, it points them to Adobe's website to download the latest version. This is likely to happen for all widely used plugins. Flash is the first because it's so widely installed. More details here: http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2009/09/04/helping-users-ke...

It's pretty easy to find this all out with a search engine, so I'm beginning to wonder if your "slightly incorrect" claims are deliberate misrepresentations. I'd question your agenda, but honestly I don't care. The facts are available for anybody with a search engine handy.

I see a lot of VP6 and Sorenson listed there. What we really have today is Flash/Flash/Flash. I'm curious about how much VC-1 use there is in the wild in the large Microsoft/Silverlight streaming video installations.

This is incorrect in multiple ways:

- The MPEG-LA is a licensing body, so it's extremely unlikely to be practicing the patent in question. Therefore it would be hard to sue them directly for infringement. It'd also be very difficult to sue them for inducing infringement due to the following point.

- The H.264 license explicitly disclaims warranty that the license provided by the MPEG-LA covers all essential patents to practice H.264. This is also mention in the public FAQ: http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Pages/FAQ.aspx

Like most people on the internet, I Am Not A Lawyer.

This is most definitely false. Why make a claim like this when you could easily verify it?

FFmpeg has an independent decoder but for encoding it uses libtheora. The FFmpeg decoder has traditionally been slower than libtheora and didn't implement all of the Theora spec. It implemented VP3 plus the part of the spec that the Theora 1.0 (and earlier) encoders produced, but failed to decode spec-compatible output from the Theora 1.1 encoder (which libtheora 1.0's decoder handles just fine). There has been a lot of development of the FFmpeg decoder recently, so most of these issues are fixed. It's possible that the decoder is faster than libtheora now (as of the last 2-3 months), but I haven't benchmarked it.

FFmpeg has had an independent VP3 and Theora decoder for years. The history goes back to 2003. The source is here: http://git.ffmpeg.org/?p=ffmpeg;a=blob;f=libavcodec/vp3.c

The claim about VP3 never being licensed to a customer is pretty ridiculous. Do you have a source?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_Interchange_Format#Uni...

If anything, Mozilla's stance towards H.264 is an attempt to avoid the web ending up in a similar situation it did with GIF, where the format was deeply entrenched before the companies controlling the licensing began asking users to pay license fees. The MPEG-LA's recent announcement that internet streaming would remain free until 2015 is a direct attempt to achieve further entrenchment of the format. There is a very real possibility that they will ask for licensing fees come 2015. And we have no idea how much they might cost. Even with free streaming, most of the people in the video production chain need to pay license fees to the MPEG-LA right now.

Your second point is valid, I hadn't considered it as a serious problem. I think a better solution than a zip file is to provide a "download" link pointing to the file that serves it with the Content-Disposition HTTP header set. This requires some control over the web server (e.g. ability to run script, or set up an htaccess file), so it's not always an option.

Edit: sorry for complaining on HN rather than contacting you directly. I was venting because it's frustrating that I couldn't watch the first few minutes of the video to decide if it's worth watching/downloading the entire video.

Nokia's N770 was close to this in 2005, and the N800 even closer by 2007. It didn't have phone hardware, but it's not a great stretch for anyone to see that phone hardware would be a useful addition at that point.

I can't find a reference, but I think the "one billion" count only counts full downloads; updates installed via "Check for updates" aren't included in the count.

Regarding the untrusted TLS certificate warnings, it seems to benefit the users who need the most help: http://www.goodgearguide.com.au/article/312438/security_cert...