Video Streaming [new?] #1150
|
|
@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
|
|||
|
|
||||
image="/assets/img/tools/mediagoblin.svg"
|
||||
url="https://www.mediagoblin.org/"
|
||||
footer="OS: Windows, macOS, Linux, FreeBSD, Web."
|
||||
description="MediaGoblin is a free/libre distributed software (server) to share many media types."
|
||||
In addition to this looking bad we cannot accept SVG due to Tor Browser if I have understood correctly. If you have imagemagick, you can https://deploy-preview-1150--privacytools-io.netlify.com/software/video-streaming/#video In addition to this looking bad we cannot accept SVG due to Tor Browser if I have understood correctly. If you have imagemagick, you can `convert mediagoblin.svg mediagoblin.png`, you may need to pass `-resize` or similar flags though.
https://deploy-preview-1150--privacytools-io.netlify.com/software/video-streaming/#video
I don't understand from this description what it does, could you think of it a bit more? The website makes it more clear to me:
Also is there a discussion of it somewhere? I don't remember hearing of it before and I think we strongly prefer discussion issues first. I don't understand from this description what it does, could you think of it a bit more? The website makes it more clear to me:
> *MediaGoblin is a free software media publishing platform that anyone can run.* You can think of it as a decentralized alternative to Flickr, YouTube, SoundCloud, etc. It's also:
Also is there a discussion of it somewhere? I don't remember hearing of it before and I think we strongly prefer discussion issues first.
This looks weird and I think you should use github from cardv2 instead. This looks weird and I think you should use github from cardv2 instead.
I think the two should be listed separately. I think the two should be listed separately.
I am also unfamiliar with FreeTube, but it looks interesting. I am also unfamiliar with FreeTube, but it looks interesting.
It's not including the whole source, is it? It's not including the whole source, is it?
FreeTube is basically the unofficial Invidious desktop client. FreeTube is basically the unofficial Invidious desktop client.
I think so: Edit: As I recall, sidebar also states some 3rd party stuff on the old version: Also, I've added a warning to KopyKate. > It's not including the whole source, is it?
I think so:
https://github.com/misses-robot/KopyKate-Big/blob/master/
**Edit**: As I recall, sidebar also states some 3rd party stuff on the old version:
https://zero.acelewis.com/#kopykate.bit (proxy)
I'm not sure what is still in use.
_________
Also, I've added a warning to KopyKate.
As it is non-free (https://github.com/misses-robot/KopyKate-Big/issues/22) and uncensored.
@Mikaela I do not understand, could you reiterate? @Mikaela I do not understand, could you reiterate?
@Mikaela I know of many on Video Streaming. @Mikaela I know of many on Video Streaming.
None in particular for MediaGoblin, but I will start one if it is required.
@Mikaela Is the new description better?
@Mikaela Is the new description better?
Should I list an instance or way to find one?
Examples:
- https://wiki.mediagoblin.org/Live_instances (list of instances)
- https://goblinrefuge.com/mediagoblin/ (popular instance)
It looks like KopyKate's last commit was early last year and doesn't even have any releases so I'm unsure how this is really useful to mention. But regardless I think we should pause iterating over feedback in the PR until we've opened a new discussion for suggesting a new "Video Streaming" section like our PR checklist metnions 😄 We can also have a community discussion for what software to include. It looks like KopyKate's [last commit](https://github.com/misses-robot/KopyKate-Big/commits/master) was early last year and doesn't even have [any releases](https://github.com/misses-robot/KopyKate-Big/releases) so I'm unsure how this is really useful to mention.
But regardless I think we should pause iterating over feedback in the PR until we've opened a [new discussion](https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/issues) for suggesting a new "Video Streaming" section like our PR checklist metnions :smile: We can also have a community discussion for what software to include.
Cool app, although it seemed to spit out some errors. Cool app, although it seemed to spit out some errors.
Either way, it should be fixed in the new commit.
@nitrohorse discussions have been ongoing: Edit: Unless you mean a Github issue? Edit 2: There is also #693 @nitrohorse discussions have been ongoing:
- https://forum.privacytools.io/search?q=%20Discussion%3A%20Video%20Sharing%2FStreaming
- https://forum.privacytools.io/search?q=Video
- #671
_______
**Edit**: Unless you mean a Github issue?
_____________
**Edit 2**: There is also #693
Didn't realize there was already a lot of discussion in https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/pull/671. I'm still thinking it'd be better to shift this discussion to a new Issue; determine if the section is needed plus the recommended software, then work on the PR which would then be straightforward and not have a lot of churn. Didn't realize there was already a lot of discussion in https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/pull/671. I'm still thinking it'd be better to shift this discussion to a new Issue; determine if the section is needed plus the recommended software, then work on the PR which would then be straightforward and not have a lot of churn.
Yeah, so
I think I'm coming in late to this but it seems like we shouldn't be discussing what software to include in a PR. That should already be determined before starting to write code IMO. Yeah, so
- the [forum issue](https://forum.privacytools.io/t/discussion-video-sharing-streaming/1287) is currently empty
- https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/pull/671 actually looks like it's still open with discussions ending in June. I'm wondering why we're opening this PR when we have that one?
- And I found this GitHub issue linked with no discussion: https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/issues/693
I think I'm coming in late to this but it seems like we shouldn't be discussing what software to include in a PR. _That_ should already be determined before starting to write code IMO.
@nitrohorse The issue is there isn't any active discussion in all 3 of those. This PR is basically just #671 without PeerTube and LBRY (with MediaGoblin) Personally, I like using LBRY and Peertube, but neither work with TOR and aren't my If you don't think WebRTC or no I2P is an issue, then by all means #671 is a good PR. TL:DR: If you think that you can start an active conversation, then I don't see why you shouldn't. @nitrohorse The issue is there isn't any active discussion in all 3 of those.
The last actual discussion in #671 was in early May when a warning to LBRY was added.
_________________
**This PR is basically just #671 without PeerTube and LBRY (with MediaGoblin)**
Personally, I like using LBRY and Peertube, but neither work with TOR and aren't my `#1` choice. There are open issues on both of these:
https://github.com/Chocobozzz/PeerTube/issues/1886 , https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-sdk/issues/1435 , https://github.com/Chocobozzz/PeerTube/issues/2030
If you don't think WebRTC or no I2P is an issue, then by all means #671 is a good PR.
__________________
**TL:DR**: If you think that you can start an active conversation, then I don't see why you shouldn't.
I just don't see this happening in the current discussions. :)
Shouldn't "Invidio" be "Invidious"? Shouldn't "Invidio" be "Invidious"?
@nitrohorse Could you explain cardv2? I think you have been doing the conversions most recently. @nitrohorse Could you explain cardv2? I think you have been doing the conversions most recently.
That may be so, but it's not the official Invidious desktop client and it doesn't carry the same name. > FreeTube is basically the unofficial Invidious desktop client.
That may be so, but it's not *the official Invidious desktop client* and it doesn't carry the same name.
Yes, it's better, but I don't see a reason to include it. Yes, it's better, but I don't see a reason to include it.
Yes, sorry I thought it was Invidio until just a couple weeks ago and forgot to change it. > Shouldn't "Invidio" be "Invidious"?
Yes, sorry I thought it was Invidio until just a couple weeks ago and forgot to change it.
Thanks!
Maybe Maybe https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/commit/bfbbeb7c3ea08a1677ddc2124cdc48145648f0c7 is of help?
|
||||
description="MediaGoblin is a free/libre distributed server software to share many media types."
|
||||
|
In addition to this looking bad we cannot accept SVG due to Tor Browser if I have understood correctly. If you have imagemagick, you can https://deploy-preview-1150--privacytools-io.netlify.com/software/video-streaming/#video In addition to this looking bad we cannot accept SVG due to Tor Browser if I have understood correctly. If you have imagemagick, you can `convert mediagoblin.svg mediagoblin.png`, you may need to pass `-resize` or similar flags though.
https://deploy-preview-1150--privacytools-io.netlify.com/software/video-streaming/#video
I don't understand from this description what it does, could you think of it a bit more? The website makes it more clear to me:
Also is there a discussion of it somewhere? I don't remember hearing of it before and I think we strongly prefer discussion issues first. I don't understand from this description what it does, could you think of it a bit more? The website makes it more clear to me:
> *MediaGoblin is a free software media publishing platform that anyone can run.* You can think of it as a decentralized alternative to Flickr, YouTube, SoundCloud, etc. It's also:
Also is there a discussion of it somewhere? I don't remember hearing of it before and I think we strongly prefer discussion issues first.
This looks weird and I think you should use github from cardv2 instead. This looks weird and I think you should use github from cardv2 instead.
I think the two should be listed separately. I think the two should be listed separately.
I am also unfamiliar with FreeTube, but it looks interesting. I am also unfamiliar with FreeTube, but it looks interesting.
It's not including the whole source, is it? It's not including the whole source, is it?
FreeTube is basically the unofficial Invidious desktop client. FreeTube is basically the unofficial Invidious desktop client.
I think so: Edit: As I recall, sidebar also states some 3rd party stuff on the old version: Also, I've added a warning to KopyKate. > It's not including the whole source, is it?
I think so:
https://github.com/misses-robot/KopyKate-Big/blob/master/
**Edit**: As I recall, sidebar also states some 3rd party stuff on the old version:
https://zero.acelewis.com/#kopykate.bit (proxy)
I'm not sure what is still in use.
_________
Also, I've added a warning to KopyKate.
As it is non-free (https://github.com/misses-robot/KopyKate-Big/issues/22) and uncensored.
@Mikaela I do not understand, could you reiterate? @Mikaela I do not understand, could you reiterate?
@Mikaela I know of many on Video Streaming. @Mikaela I know of many on Video Streaming.
None in particular for MediaGoblin, but I will start one if it is required.
@Mikaela Is the new description better?
@Mikaela Is the new description better?
Should I list an instance or way to find one?
Examples:
- https://wiki.mediagoblin.org/Live_instances (list of instances)
- https://goblinrefuge.com/mediagoblin/ (popular instance)
It looks like KopyKate's last commit was early last year and doesn't even have any releases so I'm unsure how this is really useful to mention. But regardless I think we should pause iterating over feedback in the PR until we've opened a new discussion for suggesting a new "Video Streaming" section like our PR checklist metnions 😄 We can also have a community discussion for what software to include. It looks like KopyKate's [last commit](https://github.com/misses-robot/KopyKate-Big/commits/master) was early last year and doesn't even have [any releases](https://github.com/misses-robot/KopyKate-Big/releases) so I'm unsure how this is really useful to mention.
But regardless I think we should pause iterating over feedback in the PR until we've opened a [new discussion](https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/issues) for suggesting a new "Video Streaming" section like our PR checklist metnions :smile: We can also have a community discussion for what software to include.
Cool app, although it seemed to spit out some errors. Cool app, although it seemed to spit out some errors.
Either way, it should be fixed in the new commit.
@nitrohorse discussions have been ongoing: Edit: Unless you mean a Github issue? Edit 2: There is also #693 @nitrohorse discussions have been ongoing:
- https://forum.privacytools.io/search?q=%20Discussion%3A%20Video%20Sharing%2FStreaming
- https://forum.privacytools.io/search?q=Video
- #671
_______
**Edit**: Unless you mean a Github issue?
_____________
**Edit 2**: There is also #693
Didn't realize there was already a lot of discussion in https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/pull/671. I'm still thinking it'd be better to shift this discussion to a new Issue; determine if the section is needed plus the recommended software, then work on the PR which would then be straightforward and not have a lot of churn. Didn't realize there was already a lot of discussion in https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/pull/671. I'm still thinking it'd be better to shift this discussion to a new Issue; determine if the section is needed plus the recommended software, then work on the PR which would then be straightforward and not have a lot of churn.
Yeah, so
I think I'm coming in late to this but it seems like we shouldn't be discussing what software to include in a PR. That should already be determined before starting to write code IMO. Yeah, so
- the [forum issue](https://forum.privacytools.io/t/discussion-video-sharing-streaming/1287) is currently empty
- https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/pull/671 actually looks like it's still open with discussions ending in June. I'm wondering why we're opening this PR when we have that one?
- And I found this GitHub issue linked with no discussion: https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/issues/693
I think I'm coming in late to this but it seems like we shouldn't be discussing what software to include in a PR. _That_ should already be determined before starting to write code IMO.
@nitrohorse The issue is there isn't any active discussion in all 3 of those. This PR is basically just #671 without PeerTube and LBRY (with MediaGoblin) Personally, I like using LBRY and Peertube, but neither work with TOR and aren't my If you don't think WebRTC or no I2P is an issue, then by all means #671 is a good PR. TL:DR: If you think that you can start an active conversation, then I don't see why you shouldn't. @nitrohorse The issue is there isn't any active discussion in all 3 of those.
The last actual discussion in #671 was in early May when a warning to LBRY was added.
_________________
**This PR is basically just #671 without PeerTube and LBRY (with MediaGoblin)**
Personally, I like using LBRY and Peertube, but neither work with TOR and aren't my `#1` choice. There are open issues on both of these:
https://github.com/Chocobozzz/PeerTube/issues/1886 , https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-sdk/issues/1435 , https://github.com/Chocobozzz/PeerTube/issues/2030
If you don't think WebRTC or no I2P is an issue, then by all means #671 is a good PR.
__________________
**TL:DR**: If you think that you can start an active conversation, then I don't see why you shouldn't.
I just don't see this happening in the current discussions. :)
Shouldn't "Invidio" be "Invidious"? Shouldn't "Invidio" be "Invidious"?
@nitrohorse Could you explain cardv2? I think you have been doing the conversions most recently. @nitrohorse Could you explain cardv2? I think you have been doing the conversions most recently.
That may be so, but it's not the official Invidious desktop client and it doesn't carry the same name. > FreeTube is basically the unofficial Invidious desktop client.
That may be so, but it's not *the official Invidious desktop client* and it doesn't carry the same name.
Yes, it's better, but I don't see a reason to include it. Yes, it's better, but I don't see a reason to include it.
Yes, sorry I thought it was Invidio until just a couple weeks ago and forgot to change it. > Shouldn't "Invidio" be "Invidious"?
Yes, sorry I thought it was Invidio until just a couple weeks ago and forgot to change it.
Thanks!
Maybe Maybe https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/commit/bfbbeb7c3ea08a1677ddc2124cdc48145648f0c7 is of help?
|
||||
%}
|
||||
|
For cardv2, replacing it with this can work: For cardv2, replacing it with this can work:
```
{% include cardv2.html
title="MediaGoblin"
image="/assets/img/tools/mediagoblin.png"
website="https://www.mediagoblin.org/"
description="MediaGoblin is a free/libre tool to host media files in a distributed manner."
%}
```
|
||||
|
||||
{% include card.html color="primary"
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
In addition to this looking bad we cannot accept SVG due to Tor Browser if I have understood correctly. If you have imagemagick, you can https://deploy-preview-1150--privacytools-io.netlify.com/software/video-streaming/#video In addition to this looking bad we cannot accept SVG due to Tor Browser if I have understood correctly. If you have imagemagick, you can `convert mediagoblin.svg mediagoblin.png`, you may need to pass `-resize` or similar flags though.
https://deploy-preview-1150--privacytools-io.netlify.com/software/video-streaming/#video
In addition to this looking bad we cannot accept SVG due to Tor Browser if I have understood correctly. If you have imagemagick, you can https://deploy-preview-1150--privacytools-io.netlify.com/software/video-streaming/#video In addition to this looking bad we cannot accept SVG due to Tor Browser if I have understood correctly. If you have imagemagick, you can `convert mediagoblin.svg mediagoblin.png`, you may need to pass `-resize` or similar flags though.
https://deploy-preview-1150--privacytools-io.netlify.com/software/video-streaming/#video
I don't understand from this description what it does, could you think of it a bit more? The website makes it more clear to me:
Also is there a discussion of it somewhere? I don't remember hearing of it before and I think we strongly prefer discussion issues first. I don't understand from this description what it does, could you think of it a bit more? The website makes it more clear to me:
> *MediaGoblin is a free software media publishing platform that anyone can run.* You can think of it as a decentralized alternative to Flickr, YouTube, SoundCloud, etc. It's also:
Also is there a discussion of it somewhere? I don't remember hearing of it before and I think we strongly prefer discussion issues first.
I don't understand from this description what it does, could you think of it a bit more? The website makes it more clear to me:
Also is there a discussion of it somewhere? I don't remember hearing of it before and I think we strongly prefer discussion issues first. I don't understand from this description what it does, could you think of it a bit more? The website makes it more clear to me:
> *MediaGoblin is a free software media publishing platform that anyone can run.* You can think of it as a decentralized alternative to Flickr, YouTube, SoundCloud, etc. It's also:
Also is there a discussion of it somewhere? I don't remember hearing of it before and I think we strongly prefer discussion issues first.
This looks weird and I think you should use github from cardv2 instead. This looks weird and I think you should use github from cardv2 instead.
This looks weird and I think you should use github from cardv2 instead. This looks weird and I think you should use github from cardv2 instead.
I think the two should be listed separately. I think the two should be listed separately.
I think the two should be listed separately. I think the two should be listed separately.
I am also unfamiliar with FreeTube, but it looks interesting. I am also unfamiliar with FreeTube, but it looks interesting.
I am also unfamiliar with FreeTube, but it looks interesting. I am also unfamiliar with FreeTube, but it looks interesting.
It's not including the whole source, is it? It's not including the whole source, is it?
It's not including the whole source, is it? It's not including the whole source, is it?
FreeTube is basically the unofficial Invidious desktop client. FreeTube is basically the unofficial Invidious desktop client.
FreeTube is basically the unofficial Invidious desktop client. FreeTube is basically the unofficial Invidious desktop client.
I think so: Edit: As I recall, sidebar also states some 3rd party stuff on the old version: Also, I've added a warning to KopyKate. > It's not including the whole source, is it?
I think so:
https://github.com/misses-robot/KopyKate-Big/blob/master/
**Edit**: As I recall, sidebar also states some 3rd party stuff on the old version:
https://zero.acelewis.com/#kopykate.bit (proxy)
I'm not sure what is still in use.
_________
Also, I've added a warning to KopyKate.
As it is non-free (https://github.com/misses-robot/KopyKate-Big/issues/22) and uncensored.
I think so: Edit: As I recall, sidebar also states some 3rd party stuff on the old version: Also, I've added a warning to KopyKate. > It's not including the whole source, is it?
I think so:
https://github.com/misses-robot/KopyKate-Big/blob/master/
**Edit**: As I recall, sidebar also states some 3rd party stuff on the old version:
https://zero.acelewis.com/#kopykate.bit (proxy)
I'm not sure what is still in use.
_________
Also, I've added a warning to KopyKate.
As it is non-free (https://github.com/misses-robot/KopyKate-Big/issues/22) and uncensored.
@Mikaela I do not understand, could you reiterate? @Mikaela I do not understand, could you reiterate?
@Mikaela I do not understand, could you reiterate? @Mikaela I do not understand, could you reiterate?
@Mikaela I know of many on Video Streaming. @Mikaela I know of many on Video Streaming.
None in particular for MediaGoblin, but I will start one if it is required.
@Mikaela I know of many on Video Streaming. @Mikaela I know of many on Video Streaming.
None in particular for MediaGoblin, but I will start one if it is required.
@Mikaela Is the new description better?
@Mikaela Is the new description better?
Should I list an instance or way to find one?
Examples:
- https://wiki.mediagoblin.org/Live_instances (list of instances)
- https://goblinrefuge.com/mediagoblin/ (popular instance)
@Mikaela Is the new description better?
@Mikaela Is the new description better?
Should I list an instance or way to find one?
Examples:
- https://wiki.mediagoblin.org/Live_instances (list of instances)
- https://goblinrefuge.com/mediagoblin/ (popular instance)
It looks like KopyKate's last commit was early last year and doesn't even have any releases so I'm unsure how this is really useful to mention. But regardless I think we should pause iterating over feedback in the PR until we've opened a new discussion for suggesting a new "Video Streaming" section like our PR checklist metnions 😄 We can also have a community discussion for what software to include. It looks like KopyKate's [last commit](https://github.com/misses-robot/KopyKate-Big/commits/master) was early last year and doesn't even have [any releases](https://github.com/misses-robot/KopyKate-Big/releases) so I'm unsure how this is really useful to mention.
But regardless I think we should pause iterating over feedback in the PR until we've opened a [new discussion](https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/issues) for suggesting a new "Video Streaming" section like our PR checklist metnions :smile: We can also have a community discussion for what software to include.
It looks like KopyKate's last commit was early last year and doesn't even have any releases so I'm unsure how this is really useful to mention. But regardless I think we should pause iterating over feedback in the PR until we've opened a new discussion for suggesting a new "Video Streaming" section like our PR checklist metnions 😄 We can also have a community discussion for what software to include. It looks like KopyKate's [last commit](https://github.com/misses-robot/KopyKate-Big/commits/master) was early last year and doesn't even have [any releases](https://github.com/misses-robot/KopyKate-Big/releases) so I'm unsure how this is really useful to mention.
But regardless I think we should pause iterating over feedback in the PR until we've opened a [new discussion](https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/issues) for suggesting a new "Video Streaming" section like our PR checklist metnions :smile: We can also have a community discussion for what software to include.
Cool app, although it seemed to spit out some errors. Cool app, although it seemed to spit out some errors.
Either way, it should be fixed in the new commit.
Cool app, although it seemed to spit out some errors. Cool app, although it seemed to spit out some errors.
Either way, it should be fixed in the new commit.
@nitrohorse discussions have been ongoing: Edit: Unless you mean a Github issue? Edit 2: There is also #693 @nitrohorse discussions have been ongoing:
- https://forum.privacytools.io/search?q=%20Discussion%3A%20Video%20Sharing%2FStreaming
- https://forum.privacytools.io/search?q=Video
- #671
_______
**Edit**: Unless you mean a Github issue?
_____________
**Edit 2**: There is also #693
@nitrohorse discussions have been ongoing: Edit: Unless you mean a Github issue? Edit 2: There is also #693 @nitrohorse discussions have been ongoing:
- https://forum.privacytools.io/search?q=%20Discussion%3A%20Video%20Sharing%2FStreaming
- https://forum.privacytools.io/search?q=Video
- #671
_______
**Edit**: Unless you mean a Github issue?
_____________
**Edit 2**: There is also #693
Didn't realize there was already a lot of discussion in https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/pull/671. I'm still thinking it'd be better to shift this discussion to a new Issue; determine if the section is needed plus the recommended software, then work on the PR which would then be straightforward and not have a lot of churn. Didn't realize there was already a lot of discussion in https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/pull/671. I'm still thinking it'd be better to shift this discussion to a new Issue; determine if the section is needed plus the recommended software, then work on the PR which would then be straightforward and not have a lot of churn.
Didn't realize there was already a lot of discussion in https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/pull/671. I'm still thinking it'd be better to shift this discussion to a new Issue; determine if the section is needed plus the recommended software, then work on the PR which would then be straightforward and not have a lot of churn. Didn't realize there was already a lot of discussion in https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/pull/671. I'm still thinking it'd be better to shift this discussion to a new Issue; determine if the section is needed plus the recommended software, then work on the PR which would then be straightforward and not have a lot of churn.
Yeah, so
I think I'm coming in late to this but it seems like we shouldn't be discussing what software to include in a PR. That should already be determined before starting to write code IMO. Yeah, so
- the [forum issue](https://forum.privacytools.io/t/discussion-video-sharing-streaming/1287) is currently empty
- https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/pull/671 actually looks like it's still open with discussions ending in June. I'm wondering why we're opening this PR when we have that one?
- And I found this GitHub issue linked with no discussion: https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/issues/693
I think I'm coming in late to this but it seems like we shouldn't be discussing what software to include in a PR. _That_ should already be determined before starting to write code IMO.
Yeah, so
I think I'm coming in late to this but it seems like we shouldn't be discussing what software to include in a PR. That should already be determined before starting to write code IMO. Yeah, so
- the [forum issue](https://forum.privacytools.io/t/discussion-video-sharing-streaming/1287) is currently empty
- https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/pull/671 actually looks like it's still open with discussions ending in June. I'm wondering why we're opening this PR when we have that one?
- And I found this GitHub issue linked with no discussion: https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/issues/693
I think I'm coming in late to this but it seems like we shouldn't be discussing what software to include in a PR. _That_ should already be determined before starting to write code IMO.
@nitrohorse The issue is there isn't any active discussion in all 3 of those. This PR is basically just #671 without PeerTube and LBRY (with MediaGoblin) Personally, I like using LBRY and Peertube, but neither work with TOR and aren't my If you don't think WebRTC or no I2P is an issue, then by all means #671 is a good PR. TL:DR: If you think that you can start an active conversation, then I don't see why you shouldn't. @nitrohorse The issue is there isn't any active discussion in all 3 of those.
The last actual discussion in #671 was in early May when a warning to LBRY was added.
_________________
**This PR is basically just #671 without PeerTube and LBRY (with MediaGoblin)**
Personally, I like using LBRY and Peertube, but neither work with TOR and aren't my `#1` choice. There are open issues on both of these:
https://github.com/Chocobozzz/PeerTube/issues/1886 , https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-sdk/issues/1435 , https://github.com/Chocobozzz/PeerTube/issues/2030
If you don't think WebRTC or no I2P is an issue, then by all means #671 is a good PR.
__________________
**TL:DR**: If you think that you can start an active conversation, then I don't see why you shouldn't.
I just don't see this happening in the current discussions. :)
@nitrohorse The issue is there isn't any active discussion in all 3 of those. This PR is basically just #671 without PeerTube and LBRY (with MediaGoblin) Personally, I like using LBRY and Peertube, but neither work with TOR and aren't my If you don't think WebRTC or no I2P is an issue, then by all means #671 is a good PR. TL:DR: If you think that you can start an active conversation, then I don't see why you shouldn't. @nitrohorse The issue is there isn't any active discussion in all 3 of those.
The last actual discussion in #671 was in early May when a warning to LBRY was added.
_________________
**This PR is basically just #671 without PeerTube and LBRY (with MediaGoblin)**
Personally, I like using LBRY and Peertube, but neither work with TOR and aren't my `#1` choice. There are open issues on both of these:
https://github.com/Chocobozzz/PeerTube/issues/1886 , https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-sdk/issues/1435 , https://github.com/Chocobozzz/PeerTube/issues/2030
If you don't think WebRTC or no I2P is an issue, then by all means #671 is a good PR.
__________________
**TL:DR**: If you think that you can start an active conversation, then I don't see why you shouldn't.
I just don't see this happening in the current discussions. :)
Shouldn't "Invidio" be "Invidious"? Shouldn't "Invidio" be "Invidious"?
Shouldn't "Invidio" be "Invidious"? Shouldn't "Invidio" be "Invidious"?
@nitrohorse Could you explain cardv2? I think you have been doing the conversions most recently. @nitrohorse Could you explain cardv2? I think you have been doing the conversions most recently.
@nitrohorse Could you explain cardv2? I think you have been doing the conversions most recently. @nitrohorse Could you explain cardv2? I think you have been doing the conversions most recently.
That may be so, but it's not the official Invidious desktop client and it doesn't carry the same name. > FreeTube is basically the unofficial Invidious desktop client.
That may be so, but it's not *the official Invidious desktop client* and it doesn't carry the same name.
That may be so, but it's not the official Invidious desktop client and it doesn't carry the same name. > FreeTube is basically the unofficial Invidious desktop client.
That may be so, but it's not *the official Invidious desktop client* and it doesn't carry the same name.
Yes, it's better, but I don't see a reason to include it. Yes, it's better, but I don't see a reason to include it.
Yes, it's better, but I don't see a reason to include it. Yes, it's better, but I don't see a reason to include it.
Yes, sorry I thought it was Invidio until just a couple weeks ago and forgot to change it. > Shouldn't "Invidio" be "Invidious"?
Yes, sorry I thought it was Invidio until just a couple weeks ago and forgot to change it.
Thanks!
Yes, sorry I thought it was Invidio until just a couple weeks ago and forgot to change it. > Shouldn't "Invidio" be "Invidious"?
Yes, sorry I thought it was Invidio until just a couple weeks ago and forgot to change it.
Thanks!
Maybe Maybe https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/commit/bfbbeb7c3ea08a1677ddc2124cdc48145648f0c7 is of help?
Maybe Maybe https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/commit/bfbbeb7c3ea08a1677ddc2124cdc48145648f0c7 is of help?
|
||||
In addition to this looking bad we cannot accept SVG due to Tor Browser if I have understood correctly. If you have imagemagick, you can
convert mediagoblin.svg mediagoblin.png, you may need to pass-resizeor similar flags though.https://deploy-preview-1150--privacytools-io.netlify.com/software/video-streaming/#video
In addition to this looking bad we cannot accept SVG due to Tor Browser if I have understood correctly. If you have imagemagick, you can
convert mediagoblin.svg mediagoblin.png, you may need to pass-resizeor similar flags though.https://deploy-preview-1150--privacytools-io.netlify.com/software/video-streaming/#video
I don't understand from this description what it does, could you think of it a bit more? The website makes it more clear to me:
Also is there a discussion of it somewhere? I don't remember hearing of it before and I think we strongly prefer discussion issues first.
I don't understand from this description what it does, could you think of it a bit more? The website makes it more clear to me:
Also is there a discussion of it somewhere? I don't remember hearing of it before and I think we strongly prefer discussion issues first.
This looks weird and I think you should use github from cardv2 instead.
This looks weird and I think you should use github from cardv2 instead.
I think the two should be listed separately.
I think the two should be listed separately.
I am also unfamiliar with FreeTube, but it looks interesting.
I am also unfamiliar with FreeTube, but it looks interesting.
It's not including the whole source, is it?
It's not including the whole source, is it?
FreeTube is basically the unofficial Invidious desktop client.
FreeTube is basically the unofficial Invidious desktop client.
I think so:
https://github.com/misses-robot/KopyKate-Big/blob/master/
Edit: As I recall, sidebar also states some 3rd party stuff on the old version:
https://zero.acelewis.com/#kopykate.bit (proxy)
I'm not sure what is still in use.
Also, I've added a warning to KopyKate.
As it is non-free (https://github.com/misses-robot/KopyKate-Big/issues/22) and uncensored.
I think so:
https://github.com/misses-robot/KopyKate-Big/blob/master/
Edit: As I recall, sidebar also states some 3rd party stuff on the old version:
https://zero.acelewis.com/#kopykate.bit (proxy)
I'm not sure what is still in use.
Also, I've added a warning to KopyKate.
As it is non-free (https://github.com/misses-robot/KopyKate-Big/issues/22) and uncensored.
@Mikaela I do not understand, could you reiterate?
@Mikaela I do not understand, could you reiterate?
@Mikaela I know of many on Video Streaming.
None in particular for MediaGoblin, but I will start one if it is required.
@Mikaela I know of many on Video Streaming.
None in particular for MediaGoblin, but I will start one if it is required.
@Mikaela Is the new description better?
Should I list an instance or way to find one?
Examples:
@Mikaela Is the new description better?
Should I list an instance or way to find one?
Examples:
It looks like KopyKate's last commit was early last year and doesn't even have any releases so I'm unsure how this is really useful to mention.
But regardless I think we should pause iterating over feedback in the PR until we've opened a new discussion for suggesting a new "Video Streaming" section like our PR checklist metnions 😄 We can also have a community discussion for what software to include.
It looks like KopyKate's last commit was early last year and doesn't even have any releases so I'm unsure how this is really useful to mention.
But regardless I think we should pause iterating over feedback in the PR until we've opened a new discussion for suggesting a new "Video Streaming" section like our PR checklist metnions 😄 We can also have a community discussion for what software to include.
Cool app, although it seemed to spit out some errors.
Either way, it should be fixed in the new commit.
Cool app, although it seemed to spit out some errors.
Either way, it should be fixed in the new commit.
@nitrohorse discussions have been ongoing:
https://forum.privacytools.io/search?q=%20Discussion%3A%20Video%20Sharing%2FStreaming
https://forum.privacytools.io/search?q=Video
#671
Edit: Unless you mean a Github issue?
Edit 2: There is also #693
@nitrohorse discussions have been ongoing:
https://forum.privacytools.io/search?q=%20Discussion%3A%20Video%20Sharing%2FStreaming
https://forum.privacytools.io/search?q=Video
#671
Edit: Unless you mean a Github issue?
Edit 2: There is also #693
Didn't realize there was already a lot of discussion in https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/pull/671. I'm still thinking it'd be better to shift this discussion to a new Issue; determine if the section is needed plus the recommended software, then work on the PR which would then be straightforward and not have a lot of churn.
Didn't realize there was already a lot of discussion in https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/pull/671. I'm still thinking it'd be better to shift this discussion to a new Issue; determine if the section is needed plus the recommended software, then work on the PR which would then be straightforward and not have a lot of churn.
Yeah, so
I think I'm coming in late to this but it seems like we shouldn't be discussing what software to include in a PR. That should already be determined before starting to write code IMO.
Yeah, so
I think I'm coming in late to this but it seems like we shouldn't be discussing what software to include in a PR. That should already be determined before starting to write code IMO.
@nitrohorse The issue is there isn't any active discussion in all 3 of those.
The last actual discussion in #671 was in early May when a warning to LBRY was added.
This PR is basically just #671 without PeerTube and LBRY (with MediaGoblin)
Personally, I like using LBRY and Peertube, but neither work with TOR and aren't my
#1choice. There are open issues on both of these:https://github.com/Chocobozzz/PeerTube/issues/1886 , https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-sdk/issues/1435 , https://github.com/Chocobozzz/PeerTube/issues/2030
If you don't think WebRTC or no I2P is an issue, then by all means #671 is a good PR.
TL:DR: If you think that you can start an active conversation, then I don't see why you shouldn't.
I just don't see this happening in the current discussions. :)
@nitrohorse The issue is there isn't any active discussion in all 3 of those.
The last actual discussion in #671 was in early May when a warning to LBRY was added.
This PR is basically just #671 without PeerTube and LBRY (with MediaGoblin)
Personally, I like using LBRY and Peertube, but neither work with TOR and aren't my
#1choice. There are open issues on both of these:https://github.com/Chocobozzz/PeerTube/issues/1886 , https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-sdk/issues/1435 , https://github.com/Chocobozzz/PeerTube/issues/2030
If you don't think WebRTC or no I2P is an issue, then by all means #671 is a good PR.
TL:DR: If you think that you can start an active conversation, then I don't see why you shouldn't.
I just don't see this happening in the current discussions. :)
Shouldn't "Invidio" be "Invidious"?
Shouldn't "Invidio" be "Invidious"?
@nitrohorse Could you explain cardv2? I think you have been doing the conversions most recently.
@nitrohorse Could you explain cardv2? I think you have been doing the conversions most recently.
That may be so, but it's not the official Invidious desktop client and it doesn't carry the same name.
That may be so, but it's not the official Invidious desktop client and it doesn't carry the same name.
Yes, it's better, but I don't see a reason to include it.
Yes, it's better, but I don't see a reason to include it.
Yes, sorry I thought it was Invidio until just a couple weeks ago and forgot to change it.
Thanks!
Yes, sorry I thought it was Invidio until just a couple weeks ago and forgot to change it.
Thanks!
Maybe
bfbbeb7c3eis of help?Maybe
bfbbeb7c3eis of help?