- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Five ideas for escaping the Blu-Ray blues
|
|
|
Comments (27)
7 earlier comments in the full thread.
Which version 10 of Flash is a problem? I just checked and I have Flash 10.0.r45 and it writes the flash files to /tmp and I copy them to where I want when they've finished downloading. Running lsof | grep Flash, as suggested in the article confirmed it.
plugin-co 12977 tracy 16u REG 8,3 18036076 130151 /tmp/FlashxlYE21
plugin-co 12977 tracy 16u REG 8,3 18036076 130151 /tmp/FlashxlYE21
@Tracyanne....according to my software listing and descriptions in YaST, my version running in openSUSE 11.3 is:
10.2.152.26-0.2.1
With regards to the lack of the Flash files in /tmp, I have confirmed it with three different Flash sites and in each case, there were no files of the typical Flashx8y$nnn format in /tmp after watching the flash file and keeping the browser open. It must have happened in the shift from 10.0 to 10.2 from what I can see happening.......and certainly Elf has hit the problem too. Thanks for the extra info on this rather interesting little "problem".
10.2.152.26-0.2.1
With regards to the lack of the Flash files in /tmp, I have confirmed it with three different Flash sites and in each case, there were no files of the typical Flashx8y$nnn format in /tmp after watching the flash file and keeping the browser open. It must have happened in the shift from 10.0 to 10.2 from what I can see happening.......and certainly Elf has hit the problem too. Thanks for the extra info on this rather interesting little "problem".
@Ridcully, if you are using firefox, I think the files are still stored in ~/.mozilla/firefox/xxxxxxxx.default/Cache.
Of course it will be allot harder to find 'em, so probably the method in article you posted will be easier.
Thanks Jim, but no, it isn't stored in the place you suggested directly above. I opened the Youtube flash file for Hallelujah in the Mall and ran it to the end, then kept Firefox open at that point. I then did the trick with lsof and here are the results:
tony@linux-6l1i:~> lsof | grep Flash
plugin-co 8685 tony 16w REG 8,2 25157 1198629 /tmp/FlashXXok4lIh (deleted)
As you can see, the file is STILL being stored in /tmp, but has been deleted according to its associated flag. However as Elf indicated, the processes are still there and for this particular file, they can be accessed accordingly using:
cp /proc/8685/fd/16 /home/tony/movie/hallelujah.flv
And the moment I did that, the file landed straight into /movie and away it went.
I also checked /tmp.........and nope, no Flash file. Like I said, it's a clever little ploy.....but to what advantage ? Flash files are really only of any interest to a single person, it's not as if they are going to lead to large scale piracy - or even small scale piracy for that matter. I find this attempt to close the door by Adobe rather stupid; especially since it was overcome so easily. I hope we are not going to see a DRM war on Flash files.....but then in the world of media, anything is possible.
Postscript......Just hit me. I'm running openSUSE 11.3 and there will be a copy of the Flash program on my installation disk.......It won't be 10.2 (probably 10.0).....so another option for me would be to remove Flash 10.2 and install the version on the installation disk.....things would then revert to normal.
tony@linux-6l1i:~> lsof | grep Flash
plugin-co 8685 tony 16w REG 8,2 25157 1198629 /tmp/FlashXXok4lIh (deleted)
As you can see, the file is STILL being stored in /tmp, but has been deleted according to its associated flag. However as Elf indicated, the processes are still there and for this particular file, they can be accessed accordingly using:
cp /proc/8685/fd/16 /home/tony/movie/hallelujah.flv
And the moment I did that, the file landed straight into /movie and away it went.
I also checked /tmp.........and nope, no Flash file. Like I said, it's a clever little ploy.....but to what advantage ? Flash files are really only of any interest to a single person, it's not as if they are going to lead to large scale piracy - or even small scale piracy for that matter. I find this attempt to close the door by Adobe rather stupid; especially since it was overcome so easily. I hope we are not going to see a DRM war on Flash files.....but then in the world of media, anything is possible.
Postscript......Just hit me. I'm running openSUSE 11.3 and there will be a copy of the Flash program on my installation disk.......It won't be 10.2 (probably 10.0).....so another option for me would be to remove Flash 10.2 and install the version on the installation disk.....things would then revert to normal.
Another way rid would be to incorporate the method described in the article into a script.
HD-DVD comeback?!?! I doubt it. And I wouldn't get behind a tech that is destined to go the way of the LS-120 drive or the Dodo Bird.
I'm really surprised that the CF-Card format hasn't taken off again. The size is right; big enough not to be easily lost, & small enough to be reasonably portable. A CF-Card can be crammed with plenty of gigs, & at a lower density (read: cheaper to make) than SD & MicroSD cards. At that size, they are a natural form factor for newer non-volatile RAM storage technology... And, let's face it,... If you are going to buy a movie or music, you kind of feel "cheated" if it comes in a size format that's smaller than a Nintendo DS cartridge. On top of that, there is no DRM in the spec, so any DRM would be only in the content's container file format. The only downside is unit cost against a disk. But when you consider the cost of mastering a CD or DVD, etc., & that the per-unit cost can be absorbed in the final cost, it's not too bad.
I'm really surprised that the CF-Card format hasn't taken off again. The size is right; big enough not to be easily lost, & small enough to be reasonably portable. A CF-Card can be crammed with plenty of gigs, & at a lower density (read: cheaper to make) than SD & MicroSD cards. At that size, they are a natural form factor for newer non-volatile RAM storage technology... And, let's face it,... If you are going to buy a movie or music, you kind of feel "cheated" if it comes in a size format that's smaller than a Nintendo DS cartridge. On top of that, there is no DRM in the spec, so any DRM would be only in the content's container file format. The only downside is unit cost against a disk. But when you consider the cost of mastering a CD or DVD, etc., & that the per-unit cost can be absorbed in the final cost, it's not too bad.
Sometimes i cannot 'figure it out' what you guys 'actually' want.
On the one hand you 'stagger'( and say; "there must be choice") when there 'a mention' of someone(like me), who is 'noob' to 'linux-things', and is wondering why there are so many distro's of linux, and why there is not a 'one-and-only-big-supported-by-everyone' linux distro, which has then some 'influence-weight'(like google) about 'using standards/codecs'
And on the other hand there is that 'moaning' about different codecs etc...
We should all move to New Zealand : http://en.swpat.org/wiki/New_Zealand
;-P
We should all move to New Zealand : http://en.swpat.org/wiki/New_Zealand
;-P
@henke54, I'm don't really understand your comment.
However, the fact is there is choice within the Free Open Source Paradym is simply because it's Free. The answer to why there are so my Linux distros relates back to this fact, and is quite simply "Because you can".
The only way to stop the proliferation of Linux Distros is to make the code non Free, and that, in effect, is what anyone advocating a one size fits all, or single, or even limited number of, Linux distribution, is advocating.
Both those who advocate a limited number of Linux distributions, and those who reply with "there must be choice" fail to understand the nature of Free Software.
I should point out here that Google is a large company, their influence-weight with codecs and standards has nothing to do with wether there is one or many Linux distributions, and in fact the proliferation of Linux distributions has no nearing in how much of an effect Google has in forcing thier view of standards/Codecs on the world. The same goes for every other large compant that is a major consumer of Free Software, lke IBM, for instance, who as far as I can see have a slightly different view of standards/codecs to Google.
On the other unconnected note, hopefully New Zealand will pass laws that stop the Patetability of Software.
However, the fact is there is choice within the Free Open Source Paradym is simply because it's Free. The answer to why there are so my Linux distros relates back to this fact, and is quite simply "Because you can".
The only way to stop the proliferation of Linux Distros is to make the code non Free, and that, in effect, is what anyone advocating a one size fits all, or single, or even limited number of, Linux distribution, is advocating.
Both those who advocate a limited number of Linux distributions, and those who reply with "there must be choice" fail to understand the nature of Free Software.
I should point out here that Google is a large company, their influence-weight with codecs and standards has nothing to do with wether there is one or many Linux distributions, and in fact the proliferation of Linux distributions has no nearing in how much of an effect Google has in forcing thier view of standards/Codecs on the world. The same goes for every other large compant that is a major consumer of Free Software, lke IBM, for instance, who as far as I can see have a slightly different view of standards/codecs to Google.
On the other unconnected note, hopefully New Zealand will pass laws that stop the Patetability of Software.
@tracyanne :
OK, thanks ...but the linux-community should make 'something' like liso(linux-iso) for codecs/standards/filesystems/browsers/desktop-guis/etc...something like the Linux kernel mailing list ( https://lkml.org/ ) , but then for a LISO(Linux International Standard Organisation).....just made it myself.... ;-P
my 2cents ....
@henke54. I've given your comments a little thought over a couple of days. You may care to browse through this wikipedia document:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_Standard_Base
It may not be what you intended, but it does show how the various Linux distros are trying to attain a common structural format despite their differences.
I also think you are missing one very important aspect of Free and Open Source Software. One of its greatest strengths actually IS the fact that there are so many distributions. Sure, some of these might be there simply because the person wanted to do it and could do it and perhaps these small distros vanish after a year or two if support is not there, but others are solid and in common use and have very large user bases. Those that survive do so on the basis of Darwinian principles: the more users and contributors, the more likely the distro will survive.
Here's an example to help you understand the strength of the distro variety in FOSS. I'm a biological scientist so a biological model/example appeals to me. Put it like this: if a highly infective disease gets into a non-resistant crop variety that is used everywhere by the farmers, the disease almost has a "time for free lunch and as much as you can eat" reservation card given to it. The results are devastating and rapid. We call this single type of crop (species or variety) a monoculture and it is the best way for an invasive and infective disease to spread since every plant is equally susceptible to the disease. [Something similar is actually happening in the real world right now because a new variety of rust is hitting wheat plantings and the current varieties have no resistance.]
It doesn't take much imagination to transfer the idea to Microsoft. Virtually all Microsoft platforms use the same software structures, in fact the millions upon millions of Windows computers linked over the internet forms a "computer monoculture" and sadly, the Microsoft platform has low resistance - security if you like. As a result, a Windows virus spreads and damages rapidly. The virus has a common target which is also structurally the same in each case and so infection is automatic and successful.
The various FOSS operating systems however are not like this. To begin with, security in a Linux system is automatically much higher than in a Windows system. Next, each distribution varies in small but significant ways, so a virus written to take advantage of say, a Fedora system, not only has to actually break into the system (which is far more difficult), it then faces the problem that it cannot spread and infect all Linux distributions, purely because they are different and don't accept the same viral structures. There is enormous strength, security and reliability in the very thing you appear to be finding fault with. Linux is most definitely not a "computer monoculture" and it reaps all the benefits of that fact.
Hope that helps.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_Standard_Base
It may not be what you intended, but it does show how the various Linux distros are trying to attain a common structural format despite their differences.
I also think you are missing one very important aspect of Free and Open Source Software. One of its greatest strengths actually IS the fact that there are so many distributions. Sure, some of these might be there simply because the person wanted to do it and could do it and perhaps these small distros vanish after a year or two if support is not there, but others are solid and in common use and have very large user bases. Those that survive do so on the basis of Darwinian principles: the more users and contributors, the more likely the distro will survive.
Here's an example to help you understand the strength of the distro variety in FOSS. I'm a biological scientist so a biological model/example appeals to me. Put it like this: if a highly infective disease gets into a non-resistant crop variety that is used everywhere by the farmers, the disease almost has a "time for free lunch and as much as you can eat" reservation card given to it. The results are devastating and rapid. We call this single type of crop (species or variety) a monoculture and it is the best way for an invasive and infective disease to spread since every plant is equally susceptible to the disease. [Something similar is actually happening in the real world right now because a new variety of rust is hitting wheat plantings and the current varieties have no resistance.]
It doesn't take much imagination to transfer the idea to Microsoft. Virtually all Microsoft platforms use the same software structures, in fact the millions upon millions of Windows computers linked over the internet forms a "computer monoculture" and sadly, the Microsoft platform has low resistance - security if you like. As a result, a Windows virus spreads and damages rapidly. The virus has a common target which is also structurally the same in each case and so infection is automatic and successful.
The various FOSS operating systems however are not like this. To begin with, security in a Linux system is automatically much higher than in a Windows system. Next, each distribution varies in small but significant ways, so a virus written to take advantage of say, a Fedora system, not only has to actually break into the system (which is far more difficult), it then faces the problem that it cannot spread and infect all Linux distributions, purely because they are different and don't accept the same viral structures. There is enormous strength, security and reliability in the very thing you appear to be finding fault with. Linux is most definitely not a "computer monoculture" and it reaps all the benefits of that fact.
Hope that helps.
@Ridcully ; i know/understand what you mean with that 'crops-comparison' ; 'variation is what mother-nature keeps going' ,... but let's take other 'standard-comparisons' ;
- money : wouldn't the world be better with one world-unit ?
- physics : lots of 'confusion' with different measurement-units/symbols/communication/etc...etc....
@henke54 Bluntly.........No !! The cooperative and sharing effort from all of the various FOSS/Linux people and distributions is far and away in front of anything a proprietary, one-shop, closed source, single OS based on profit can ever produce in research and software advancement - and here I am thinking of both Microsoft and Apple. What you seem to not yet understand is that even though research may be done on a particular distribution, DE or software item, the supporters of that particular community and other communities then take up the item and modify it very rapidly to make it freely available elsewhere in the entire Linux/FOSS community. This is very different from the proprietary models which hug advances to themselves and make you pay if you want them.
The more you work with Linux, the more you realise that its diversity is one of its richest assets. If you haven't yet realised that criterion, you still have a very interesting trip ahead of you. In my earliest days of Linux, I began to despair of the fact that there was not a single window manager, all the same as Microsoft. How could you ever keep track of Gnome, KDE, Xfce, LXDE, Fluxbox, etc. etc. etc. But slowly I began to understand that each of these window managers (or DE's - Desktop Environments) has advantages and disadvantages to those who use them. Some DE's are better suited for some tasks, some are faster than others, some you feel more comfortable with when you are using them, and so on. Now, the diversity of DE's is just one of the many things that I see as a huge advantage in FOSS/Linux.......you have ultimate choice to work with the DE that best suits you; there is no "one-size fits all, like it or not" as there is in Windows. And now, would I change this aspect.......never, never, NEVER. It is part of the charm and superiority of the world of FOSS and Linux.
The more you work with Linux, the more you realise that its diversity is one of its richest assets. If you haven't yet realised that criterion, you still have a very interesting trip ahead of you. In my earliest days of Linux, I began to despair of the fact that there was not a single window manager, all the same as Microsoft. How could you ever keep track of Gnome, KDE, Xfce, LXDE, Fluxbox, etc. etc. etc. But slowly I began to understand that each of these window managers (or DE's - Desktop Environments) has advantages and disadvantages to those who use them. Some DE's are better suited for some tasks, some are faster than others, some you feel more comfortable with when you are using them, and so on. Now, the diversity of DE's is just one of the many things that I see as a huge advantage in FOSS/Linux.......you have ultimate choice to work with the DE that best suits you; there is no "one-size fits all, like it or not" as there is in Windows. And now, would I change this aspect.......never, never, NEVER. It is part of the charm and superiority of the world of FOSS and Linux.
jimbauwens: If the manual of set top boxes doesn't tell you where to get the source, file a complaint to gpl-violations. I think they'll be happy to hear ;)
At T-Dose 2006 (? or so, it was the first one) someone from Philips told the audience how GPL requires it and Philips obliges to it.
henke: ISO isn't everything. They lost trust after Microsoft showed it can succesfully stuff committees to make ISO handle in favour of corporations instead of society. So ISO itself should be opened, something like OpenISO. Has been proposed, but Norbert was too busy, and it's an enormous task of course. It will probably only work if large corporations are using the standards, as that's how DIN (first standardization organization afaik) came into being: Both companies, society, politics and customers and everybody else agreed open standards were beneficial.
Nowadays, companies like Microsoft, AutoDesk, Adobe and Apple have shown time and time again closed standards are even more beneficial, at least to them.
Now, let's look at why revolutions are succesfull: My limited 'knowledge and wisdom' tells me it is because society no longer supports the "powers that be". So, when would leading corporations stop filling their pockets by means of screwing their customers, using closed stuff _designed_ to cost the customer as much money as possible? Well, only if society stops supporting them.
Not going to happen, because far too many people support Steve's (pick one of the two) religion.
Ridcully: If you can't find the tempfiles, blame Firefox. It splits the files up.
Say you walk (1) 6 mile, then (2) .5 mile, than (3) 11 mile and then (4) 2.5 mile. 20 mile together.
What Firefox would do, is make chunks of five mile.
Like, take the first 5 mile of (1) and put it into file1, take the last mile of (1), add (2) and take the first 3,5 mile of (3) and put it into file2, take the consecutive 5 mile of (3) and put it into file3, take the last 2,5 mile of (3), add (4) and put it into file4.
Those flv files most of the time are very large, so chances are they are split.
How about going to about:cache , then picking one of the links (think it is device cache), and then right-clicking whatever you're looking for and saving to your HD? Actually, it's more like copying - because it's already cached on your HD.
But why take all those efforts if Firefox offers lots of 'Youtube downloaders'? It shows a download-button next to every Youtube-video you browse, and you can convert to some other media formats or only save the audio as MP3.
Try this:
[url=http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=navclient&gfns=1&q=firefox addons youtube downloader]http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=navc...[/url] #sclient=psy&hl=en&q=firefox+addons+youtube+downloader+site:addons.mozilla.org&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&fp=a020941effff3d10
At T-Dose 2006 (? or so, it was the first one) someone from Philips told the audience how GPL requires it and Philips obliges to it.
henke: ISO isn't everything. They lost trust after Microsoft showed it can succesfully stuff committees to make ISO handle in favour of corporations instead of society. So ISO itself should be opened, something like OpenISO. Has been proposed, but Norbert was too busy, and it's an enormous task of course. It will probably only work if large corporations are using the standards, as that's how DIN (first standardization organization afaik) came into being: Both companies, society, politics and customers and everybody else agreed open standards were beneficial.
Nowadays, companies like Microsoft, AutoDesk, Adobe and Apple have shown time and time again closed standards are even more beneficial, at least to them.
Now, let's look at why revolutions are succesfull: My limited 'knowledge and wisdom' tells me it is because society no longer supports the "powers that be". So, when would leading corporations stop filling their pockets by means of screwing their customers, using closed stuff _designed_ to cost the customer as much money as possible? Well, only if society stops supporting them.
Not going to happen, because far too many people support Steve's (pick one of the two) religion.
Ridcully: If you can't find the tempfiles, blame Firefox. It splits the files up.
Say you walk (1) 6 mile, then (2) .5 mile, than (3) 11 mile and then (4) 2.5 mile. 20 mile together.
What Firefox would do, is make chunks of five mile.
Like, take the first 5 mile of (1) and put it into file1, take the last mile of (1), add (2) and take the first 3,5 mile of (3) and put it into file2, take the consecutive 5 mile of (3) and put it into file3, take the last 2,5 mile of (3), add (4) and put it into file4.
Those flv files most of the time are very large, so chances are they are split.
How about going to about:cache , then picking one of the links (think it is device cache), and then right-clicking whatever you're looking for and saving to your HD? Actually, it's more like copying - because it's already cached on your HD.
But why take all those efforts if Firefox offers lots of 'Youtube downloaders'? It shows a download-button next to every Youtube-video you browse, and you can convert to some other media formats or only save the audio as MP3.
Try this:
[url=http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=navclient&gfns=1&q=firefox addons youtube downloader]http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=navc...[/url] #sclient=psy&hl=en&q=firefox+addons+youtube+downloader+site:addons.mozilla.org&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&fp=a020941effff3d10
@hkwint........Three things, because now you really DO have me confused.
First, lsof clearly indicates that the file was there, fully intact, in /tmp, but the flag beside it says deleted. I have downloaded 30Megbyte size flash files in the past with this version of Firefox without any trouble and it has not been updated to my knowledge. Those downloaded files automatically appeared in /tmp with the word "Flash" beginning the file name and could be removed or copied to a new location as full files. So splitting into chunks as you suggest does not seem to be happening at all.
Second, the process I am describing above works and seems to confirm precisely what the Elf web article describes. The complete Flash file is "still there" but deleted, however the computer is still running its process and that can be copied to retrieve the deleted file exactly as it was.
Third, I'd be absolutely delighted to know where that download button is because I cannot find it. Do you actually mean that first I have to get a Flash file download plug in for Firefox and it is the plugin that sets up the download button ? I rarely use plug-ins because normally I have little use for them, but if a plug-in is all that is necessary for this process, then I'd be very pleased to grab it.
As always, my thanks for your comments and help........but I think that there is also something wrong with the urls above. They aren't active and they are incomplete.
First, lsof clearly indicates that the file was there, fully intact, in /tmp, but the flag beside it says deleted. I have downloaded 30Megbyte size flash files in the past with this version of Firefox without any trouble and it has not been updated to my knowledge. Those downloaded files automatically appeared in /tmp with the word "Flash" beginning the file name and could be removed or copied to a new location as full files. So splitting into chunks as you suggest does not seem to be happening at all.
Second, the process I am describing above works and seems to confirm precisely what the Elf web article describes. The complete Flash file is "still there" but deleted, however the computer is still running its process and that can be copied to retrieve the deleted file exactly as it was.
Third, I'd be absolutely delighted to know where that download button is because I cannot find it. Do you actually mean that first I have to get a Flash file download plug in for Firefox and it is the plugin that sets up the download button ? I rarely use plug-ins because normally I have little use for them, but if a plug-in is all that is necessary for this process, then I'd be very pleased to grab it.
As always, my thanks for your comments and help........but I think that there is also something wrong with the urls above. They aren't active and they are incomplete.
@hans, I know, and I have done that before. My point is that I didn't have to ask for the source, and that is exception nowadays ;-)
Yeah, LXer's BB board has problems with URL's it seems.
Google for "Firefox addons youtube downloader site:mozilla.org".
Please make sure only to download addons from addons.mozilla.org.
Google for "Firefox addons youtube downloader site:mozilla.org".
Please make sure only to download addons from addons.mozilla.org.
@hkwint.......Thanks Hans......downloaded, installed, tested, running and confirmed it all works. Very easy to use and lots of things to tweak. Had never bothered with it before as the copy of the /tmp location was so easy to do.. But given this addon and how simple it makes the process, one is again forced to ask oneself why Adobe did what they apparently have.........But, ours not to reason why, I guess.....just accept that DRM is involved somewhere I suppose.
Glad to hear! Now you don't have to use that 1978 VHS-camera anymore to capture the screen!
@Hkwint.........What 1978 VHS-camera ?????.......Huh !!! How could you make such a slight on my screen capture skills. Of course, you realise (to quote a "wascally wabbit"), this means war ? LOL in spades. :-)
PS.......in point of fact, I actually did use such a camera a very, very long time ago in order to try to capture an old 16mm movie film.....It wasn't very successful as I recall. Thank goodness for digital media.
PS.......in point of fact, I actually did use such a camera a very, very long time ago in order to try to capture an old 16mm movie film.....It wasn't very successful as I recall. Thank goodness for digital media.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post
This process cannot now be used if you upgrade to Flash v10 and users will find that there is apparently no temporary Flash file present in /tmp and yet, you can still play and replay the file in the browser - unless of course you close the site when it is lost as usual. So, apparently "the file is still there, but isn't" or at least it is certainly not visible to the Dolphin file manager. Seems like the clever boys at Adobe decided it was "not nice" for anybody to keep copies of flash files from the internet and hit the "sabotage buttons". I find that very annoying because videos of news events are very useful archives for preparation of documents etc.
But if one man can produce a lock, another man can produce a key, and a workaround is already out and is to be found here:
http://www.elfsternberg.com/2010/11/15/linux-flash-10-saving...
Elf Sternberg explains it better than I can and the blocking method used by Adobe is rather "cute". But if the Flash player can find the "missing file", so can other processes and that's how Elf's technique does it. I have already tried out his solution and it worked perfectly. Of course, you can refuse to upgrade to v10, in which case you can do things as normal.