No, I don’t want any pro-profit ad-supported services integrated directly into a critical FOSS project like VideoLAN. This is a form of enshittification. VLC should NEVER implement native support for targeted advertising. Pluto and Tubi are already cramming ads into my smart TV, they need to stay the fuck away from VLC’s core code.
Freedom of choice is writing a channel service extension for VLC that I can install if I want to, not integrating non-free anti-consumer bullshit into the application itself.
I really don’t see how this is enshittification or anti-consumer. Nothing about your use of or experience of VLC changes if you simply don’t use FAST streams. To me this seems similar to whether or not to ship patent encumbered codecs.
What if Disney wanted to integrate their own DRM support into the Linux Kernel so you could watch Disney Blu-Ray movies? Would you accept the “you don’t have to watch Disney movies” justification?
I’d be fine with VLC having a way to watch proprietary Blu-Rays. I think it has that feature and it does seem useful for those who want to watch Disney Blu-Rays. VLC is supposed to be pretty much a swiss army knife of media players, after all.
If you wanted to compare to the kernel then best comparison would be to something like proprietary drivers or something.
We had to fight corporations for the right to decode DVDs and Blu-rays with FOSS software. This has been a major part of the software freedom movement. I don’t want to see a deviation away from principles.
There’s room for both the principled take and the practicality. We have both FOSS distros and those that ship patent encumbered stuff and proprietary driver.
FAST isn’t a format, it’s an integration. The format is streaming mpeg like everything else.
If FAST services want to be a part of VLC, they can just write their own extension.
Better?
No, I don’t want any pro-profit ad-supported services integrated directly into a critical FOSS project like VideoLAN. This is a form of enshittification. VLC should NEVER implement native support for targeted advertising. Pluto and Tubi are already cramming ads into my smart TV, they need to stay the fuck away from VLC’s core code.
Freedom of choice is writing a channel service extension for VLC that I can install if I want to, not integrating non-free anti-consumer bullshit into the application itself.
I really don’t see how this is enshittification or anti-consumer. Nothing about your use of or experience of VLC changes if you simply don’t use FAST streams. To me this seems similar to whether or not to ship patent encumbered codecs.
What if Disney wanted to integrate their own DRM support into the Linux Kernel so you could watch Disney Blu-Ray movies? Would you accept the “you don’t have to watch Disney movies” justification?
I’d be fine with VLC having a way to watch proprietary Blu-Rays. I think it has that feature and it does seem useful for those who want to watch Disney Blu-Rays. VLC is supposed to be pretty much a swiss army knife of media players, after all.
If you wanted to compare to the kernel then best comparison would be to something like proprietary drivers or something.
We had to fight corporations for the right to decode DVDs and Blu-rays with FOSS software. This has been a major part of the software freedom movement. I don’t want to see a deviation away from principles.
There’s room for both the principled take and the practicality. We have both FOSS distros and those that ship patent encumbered stuff and proprietary driver.
And VideoLAN has been pricipled for nearly 15 years. I’d like to see them stay that way.