Posted by Sven Hesse on 01/19/42 11:43

Immortalist <Reanimater_2000@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> "Sven Hesse" <drmccoy@users.sourceforge.net> wrote in message
> news:slrne2faep.3sg.drmccoy@tchibo.coffee.org...
>> Immortalist <Reanimater_2000@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> There is also a way to download the smal flash file, decompile
>>> the code and find the domain and archie and then past the number in the
>>> original url on the back and paste it in the address box, click and it
>>> asks
>>> you if you want to download.
>>
>> That's what I did, you'll get a FLV (Flash Video), playable with
>> MPlayer or VLC, for example...
>>
>
> Actually there is a further way to get the original uploaded movie file in
> various formats that it was uploaded in.

That may be, I don't really care that much for these videos...

>> Nope, capturing the screen is not at all superior, you'll lose quality
>> by the multiple encodings...
>>
>
> True, but good enough for collecting rare stuff. The quality can be adjusted
> higher than the original content if your accessing your video and audio
> drivers from DVDx.

By "original content" you mean what you see when you watch directly from
YouTube via the flashplayer? If so, then "the quality can be adjusted
higher" is just plain bullshit. When you capture the screen, you'll get
images of an already (lossy) compressed video, (lossy-)compressing them
again when returning these to a video will _never_ increase the quality,
quite the contrary, it will reduce it severly...
For me, as a "quality fetishist", it's downright not acceptable...

>> Crossposting in the many groups, especially since your posts are
>> completely off-topic in most of them is certainly evil.
>> Also, you posted this message twice in the span of a few days...
>>
>
> All the groups but philosophy have something to do with music. I normally
> post from philosophy.

Asking/Advertising how to download videos from YouTube still isn't
relavent in these groups, IMHO. There's probably a
alt.comp.internet.culture or something like that, there it would be more
appropriate...

> What do you mean by evil? Is that something you say when you can't think of
> anything else?

Just a generic word for "bad, don't do that", it's quite commonly used
for that meaning where I'm at (often pronounced in a ridiculous manner
of some sort, sounding more like "evul"). I thought it'd would be pretty
widespread, maybe I was wrong there... *shrug*

> Is it religious

Nope

> just the equivalent to bad?

Yep

[irrelevant stuff snipped]

> All the groups have something to do with music except my main hang out in
> philosophy.

Yeah, but not directly to YouTube or similar, you can get music videos
far more easier and with higher quality from nearly everywhere (from one
of the thousands of P2P-networks, for example).

> What about the others who decide not to post a real name? Are you saying
> they should be condemned?

Nope, not at all. It also was just a minor point, the other two
weighting far more.

> Please amplify this ethical standard to better persuade us.

It's just that a real name gives you more credibility, since you're less
likely to flame or troll away when you're not called "L33THAXORZ" or
something...

[Back to original message]