Some Firefox users noticed playback issues on YouTube for several months. These affected high resolution videos only, from 1080p and up. To make matters worse, no clear pattern could be identified.

Some videos played fine, others would stop abruptly when they ran out of buffer.

  • teawrecks
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    You can’t just redefine an established term because it’s inconvenient to your argument.

    Agreed, which is why you can’t expect to enforce the definition you like on everyone. The only thing about “open source” that we agree on is that the “source” is “open”.

    I’m realizing you’re working with outdated information. Take a look at the license again, it’s been updated.

    • Adanisi@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      you can’t expect to enforce the definition you like on everyone

      It is literally the definition which has been used since the term’s conception when the open source movement split off from the software freedom movement. It is a well established term with a well established meaning. Just because you don’t want to use that meaning doesn’t mean it isn’t correct and most widely recognised. Its not that I like the definition, it’s that it is the primary definition and always has been.

      Taking the words “open” and “source” separately and interpreting them as you like and combining them is just changing well established meanings to suit yourself, when the whole term “open source” is already well defined.

      it’s been updated

      Okay the new one does seem a bit less egregious to be fair but still doesn’t fit the open source definition due to the restrictions on how you’re allowed to use it and redistribute it.

      • teawrecks
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        It is literally the definition which has been used since the term’s conception when the open source movement split off from the software freedom movement

        No, it’s the definition the Open Source Initiative has used since their inception. They are just one of many open source communities with their own licenses.

        I think we’ll have to agree to disagree (which is my entire point). Cheers.

        • Adanisi@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          No, it’s the definition the Open Source Initiative has used since their inception.

          Which… split off from the FSF and the software freedom movement to create the open source movement. Like I said. And that term was never used before they created it. They literally created it and started it’s use. They defined the term. And newcomers don’t get to come and change it because they feel like it.

          They are just one of many open source communities with their own licenses.

          Again, established definition. Stop trying to legitimise your self-concocted definition of “open source”.