05.03.21

Adding, Seaming Together, Merging, or Concatenating Videos From the Command Line With FFMPEG (Scripting for Streamlining of Workflows)

Posted in Videos at 11:19 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link

Summary: In order to enrich the looks of videos with almost no extra time/effort (all scripted, no GUIs should be needed) use ffmpeg with the concat operator; but there are several big gotchas, namely lack of sound and need for consistency across formats/codecs and even sampling rates

TODAY we focused on some site ‘logistics’ and especially dealt with video and sound. The goal is to automate some tasks and/or improve the presentation of multimedia using Free software. Free as in freedom…

Frankly, the tool we used to generate some video segments was an “online” thing called Canva (never heard of it before, but it seems powerful enough and doesn’t require downloading anything, logging in etc. — not even an E-mail address). On the face of it, problem solved! But no… it gets trickier from then on. I spent many hours working around barriers.

Well, ffmpeg is very powerful and extremely versatile. However, as it turns out, ffmpeg will first need to convert .mp4 files downloaded from there (Canva) so as to incorporate sound, even if it’s just mute (inaudible sound track).

For this reason and for that purpose, as per people who had similar issues concatenation tracks that lack sound (merged or combined with some that do have sound), run a command as follows (depending on the sampling rate, 48000 in my case, or else the sound/pitch will be funny).

ffmpeg -i "file.mp4" -f lavfi -i anullsrc=cl=mono:r=48000 -shortest -y "file-new.mp4"

Assuming you now have a track that is compatible with what you’d merge it with, ensure that the original is moreover re-encoded for it to be applied consistently. As I always record as WebM, I need to then run (for a video like the above):

ffmpeg -i video-ffmpeg-concat.webm -c:v libx264 -preset slow video-ffmpeg-concat.mp4

This yields something suitable as it must be strictly compatible in sampling, codec type, and other factors. That’s a limitation in ffmpeg. This is a common issue for a lot of people and it took me hours to overcome (many trials and errors). I wished to document this as other people too got stuck (many forum posts).

Depending on which files you wish to concatenate with (and the order), write down the ‘recipe’, e.g. recipe.txt, containing

file file-new.mp4
file testing-6.mp4
file outro-new.mp4

Relative paths too can be prepended (e.g. file Videos/outro-new.mp4). The ffmpeg documentation explains the syntax better. There’s a lot more about concat [1, 2].

Then run everything as follows:

ffmpeg -f concat -i recipe.txt output.webm

The reason the assembly of files is done with .mp4 files (to yield a WebM) is the insistence of Canva that downloaded videos are either MP4 or GIF. There must be some better ways and I’ll improve this over time (this is all still very fresh in the mind; I’ve spent a lot of time on this).

From now on we have the ability to make videos that are 1) smaller in size because of re-encoding with strong compression and 2) have a little bit of extra context. We’ll improve this over time and push to git.

Update: This is what the outcome can look like (mind start and end of clip).

Video download link

04.26.21

Richard Stallman Explains What’s Wrong With YouTube From a Free Software Perspective (Update: Transcript)

Posted in Free/Libre Software, Google, Videos at 11:02 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Dr. Richard Stallman, the Free Software Foundation’s founder, talks about restrictions that exist when it comes to YouTube (the same still applies, except Flash, and it has gotten worse since)


Direct download as Ogg

Transcript added:

[00:00]

(intro music)

RMS: YouTube requires running non-Free Software. Either you have to run Flash Player or you have to run a non-Free JavaScript program. To watch a WebM video from YouTube requires running a non-Free JavaScript program. Although that’s

[00:30]

not inherently necessary. They could serve up the WebM files without that, but they don’t. So I can’t watch things on YouTube and I don’t. I’ve seen other people do it and it seemed that it worked even some months ago without having to log in. Are you saying that they’ve changed that?

Roy: Not necessarily but Google has had other ways to try to

[01:00]

keep track of the users. Increasingly there is linkage even in Android between the Google profiles of people and now they’re also linking the comments in YouTube to people’s Google profile.

RMS: I don’t think you should have a Google profile. At least if you do then you shouldn’t use it for very much. Android is becoming oppressive in its requirements for users to make

[01:30]

an account with Google. But Android is not Free Software. There is the Android source code that Google releases which is Free Software, but that’s quite different from the collection of software that comes in a phone that says it’s running Android. So if you want to see all the details of this, cause there are a lot of details, look at www.gnu.org/philosophy/android-and-users-freedom.html

04.24.21

OIN’s Deb Nicholson: We Don’t Solve Any Real Issues, Just Like OSI (Where Nicholson is Now Interim General Manager)

Posted in GNU/Linux, ISO, OIN, OSI, Patents, Videos at 8:28 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

OSI board

Microsoft Tim's interview with Neil McGovern

Summary: Before working at OSI, whose sole accomplishment so far is an attack on the FSF, she worked for IBM (et al) front group OIN and SFC, which is another attack group that raises money from Microsoft and then attacks the FSF

“WHY on Earth are you picking on Nicholson???”

One might actually say a foolish thing like this, conveniently ignoring the fact that — putting aside irrelevant gender aspects — Nicholson worked for SFC while SFC was attacking Richard Stallman, lobbying and pressing for his removal. At the same time she brought Microsoft money to the SFC for two years in a row, then moved to the flailing OSI, where only months later she and her colleagues started a campaign of defamation against Stallman and an extended campaign to undermine the FSF (using ‘guilt’ by association tactics).

“At the same time she brought Microsoft money to the SFC for two years in a row, then moved to the flailing OSI, where only months later she and her colleagues started a campaign of defamation against Stallman and an extended campaign to undermine the FSF (using ‘guilt’ by association tactics).”The hate letter’s perpetrators actually plotted to redefine Free software and make proprietary software seem "OK" only 1.5 months before they found an excuse to start a vicious attack, helped by media that’s funded by proprietary software giants.

Looking back, there’s a track record of bad deeds. Nicholson’s bosses at SFC — like herself — were given an award a month ago. Can’t they recognise the self-harm they’re doing? De Raadt, Miguel de Icaza, Garrett, Nicholson, Kuhn…

What on Earth is going on and who stands to benefit?

Prior to the stints at the SFC and OSI there was a stint at the Open Invention Network (OIN).

“They clearly do nothing to tackle software patents or patent trolls and they mostly protect monopolies, just like OSI ‘minionry’ does these days.”The totally useless OIN, which we’ve criticised for quite some time (the short story is, they seek to undermine true patent reform and distract from opponents of software patents, instead working to legitimise such patents), is no good. GNU developers we’ve spoken to are saying the same. Some GNU/Linux developers who are threatened by patent trolls also receive no help from OIN. We did a series about this last month.

In the following video, which is rather old by now, we have an almost open (or frank) admission that OIN is of no real use to software developers. It’s for monopolies that cross-licence.

To quote from the video: “You wouldn’t be able to sue IBM for it…”

They clearly do nothing to tackle software patents or patent trolls and they mostly protect monopolies, just like OSI ‘minionry’ does these days. The portion below (Fair Use) is 4:00-5:20 from the full video.

Video download link

Notice how the questions aren’t even being answered (or not properly anyway) until pressed further and further. Roblimo died years ago and I still feel deep sadness over it (I shed tears, too), as he was always nice to me and wanted to hear my side of the story, especially on things which truly mattered (he also put me in the radio 14 years ago when he worked for Slashdot and we debated OOXML).

04.20.21

Richard Stallman on How UPC is a Trojan Horse for Software Patents in Europe

Posted in Europe, Interview, Patents, Videos at 12:19 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Direct download as Ogg (00:01:11, 3.8 MB)

Summary: Dr. Richard Stallman, the Free Software Foundation’s founder, offers his analysis of the Unitary Patent (or UPC) and what it means for software patents in Europe now that the EPO increases its influence over continental law


Transcript:

[00:00]

(intro music)

Roy: Here we’ve got this thing called the Unitary Patent. Do you know about the …

RMS: I know a lot about the Unitary Patent and I known that there’s a danger it would turn out to be a sneaky way to legitimize software patents.

Roy: Yes.

RMS: Because in the fine print of the deal for the Unitary Patent it says that the policy decisions of the European

[00:30]

Patent Office will govern all appeals against the decisions of the European Patent Office, which makes the European Patent Office autonomous, totally out of democratic control, and allowed to wreak havoc on whatever fields it chooses to. We know it wants software patents. It wants to put patents on computing ideas, because it has already issued patents on computing ideas.

Roy: Yeah.

RMS: So he question is can this be

[01:00]

stopped?

04.10.21

Self-Hosting Videos With Free Formats and Animated Previews, Watermarks/Logos and Translucency

Posted in Site News, Videos at 11:13 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: We examine the power of video editing with ffmpeg, chained with command-line scripting and HTML5 features

The Web is a powerful platform — to the point where it’s a little ‘too’ powerful if put in the hands of malicious actors. But we’re still using the Web by default; it’s just what most people use. Video functionality on the Web improved a lot over the years, putting aside DRM/EME. So let’s explore what we can accomplish with some command-line scripting and ffmpeg.

We’re always trying to encourage digital autonomy, which is why we adopt self-hosting whenever possible. This includes videos. For the sake of example, in this post we use an old video about Gemini proxies. It was picked at random, no special reason at all. None.

Extracting bits of the video with ffmpeg isn’t hard (check the official ffmpeg Web site; their documentation explains the pertinent options, which should be changed depending on the video):

ffmpeg -ss 600 -t 5 -i gemini-proxies.webm -vf "select=not(mod(n\,1)),fps=10,scale=480:-1:flags=lanczos,split[s0][s1];[s0]palettegen[p];[s1][p]paletteuse" -loop 0 roy-talks.gif

This gets us started:

To add the resultant preview (known as “poster”) to the video, consider using the following, based on the above example: poster="http://techrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/roy-talks.gif"

This attribute belongs in the <video> element as it is part of the standard.

Add the watermark/logo with ffmpeg:

ffmpeg -i roy-talks.gif -i mogz-video-poster-4-small.png -filter_complex "overlay=0:H-h--1" -codec:a copy roy-talks2.gif

We use artwork prepared by Mogz for us.

These two passes may be lossy and maybe possible to combine rather easily, but splitting it into two stages aids simplicity. Here it goes:

For center: overlay=(W-w)/2:(H-h)/2
Top left (with 5 pixels of padding): overlay=5:5
Top right: overlay=W-w-5:5
Bottom right: overlay=W-w-5:H-h-5
Bottom left: overlay=5:H-h-5

With improved quality and translucency:

ffmpeg -i roy-talks.gif -i mogz-video-poster-4-small.png -filter_complex "[1]format=rgba,colorchannelmixer=aa=0.7[logo];[0][logo]overlay=0:H-h--1:format=auto" -codec:a copy roy-talks2.gif

The above scripts are possible to chain together and variables can be used, too. Let’s change the time to one minute from the start (-ss 60) for a duration of 2 seconds (-t 2):

VIDEO_FILE='gemini-proxies'
ffmpeg -ss 60 -t 2 -i $VIDEO_FILE.webm -vf "select=not(mod(n\,1)),fps=10,scale=480:-1:flags=lanczos,split[s0][s1];[s0]palettegen[p];[s1][p]paletteuse" -loop 0 intermediate.gif
ffmpeg -i intermediate.gif -i mogz-video-poster-4-small.png -filter_complex "[1]format=rgba,colorchannelmixer=aa=0.7[logo];[0][logo]overlay=0:H-h--1:format=auto" -codec:a copy $VIDEO_FILE.gif

Of course it is also possible to use loops and batch-process many files in this way. Welcome to the power of GNU/Linux.

Voila. The translucency is easier to see because of the mug of coffee.

Lunduke: On Mob Justice in the Tech Industry

Posted in FSF, Videos at 4:10 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: A new video from the former Microsofter who fears the phenomenon that’s adopted by companies like IBM

04.05.21

Taylor: My Personal Web Site Will Now be Gemini Capsule

Posted in Videos at 7:53 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Published hours ago

Summary: Derek Taylor (better known as “DistroTube”) is cutting down the (Web) fats by moving everything to Gemini, treating the World Wide Web as merely a mirror of his Gemini capsule

04.02.21

The Message of RMS That Monopolies Dislike Isn’t Political

Posted in FSF, GPL, Videos at 7:02 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Speeches such as this one are the real reason IBM, Microsoft, Google and so on still try very, very hard to ‘cancel’ the person and his message

Transcript added below.

[00:00]

I have been fighting for freedom for a long time.

22 years now, I announced the beginning of the free software movement, a social movement for freedom for computer users.

Specifically, the freedom to cooperate and the freedom to control your own computer, the freedom for users to work together in a community controlling the software that they use

This was

[00:30]

impossible in 1983 because computers don’t do anything without an operating system it’s just a piece of metal and silicon that’s totally useless.

But all the operating systems 22 years ago were proprietary software, software that keeps users divided and helpless. So, I was determined not to have to live that way when using computers I don’t want to be helpless and I don’t want to be forbidden to share with you.

[01:00]

So I decided I would do something about it. What could I do? I had no political party behind me. I couldn’t expect to convince governments or corporations to change any of their policies, but I did know how to write software. So I said I’m going to develop another operating system with the help of whoever will join in and together we will make it free software. We will respect your freedom and you will be able

[01:30]

then to use computers in freedom with this operating system. What does this freedom mean? There are four essential freedoms that make the definition of free software. And, they are: freedom 0, the freedom to run the program however you wish. Freedom 1, the freedom to help yourself. That’s the freedom to study the source code and change it to do what you wish. Then there’s

[02:00]

freedom 2, the freedom to help your neighbor. That’s the freedom to copy the program and distribute the copies to others when you wish. And freedom 3 is the freedom to help your community. That’s the freedom to publish or distribute a modified version when you wish. With all four freedoms, the program is free software. But these freedoms should not be strange to you. At least not if you cook. Because people who cook enjoy the same

[02:30]

four freedoms in using recipes. The freedom to cook the recipe when you want. That’s freedom 0. The freedom to study the ingredients and how it’s done and then change it. That’s freedom 1. Cooks frequently change recipes. And then the freedom to copy it and hand copies to your friends. That’s freedom 2. And then there’s freedom 3 [which] is less frequently exercised because it’s more work but if you cook your version of the recipe for a dinner for your friends and a

[03:00]

friend says, “that was great, could I have the recipe?”, you can write down your version of the recipe and make a copy for your friend. The same four freedoms, and this is no coincidence, because programs like recipes are works that you use for practical work. You’re using them to do something. And when you use a work to do something, if you’re not in control of it, you’re not in control of your life and if you can’t share

[03:30]

with other people you’re forbidden to be part of a community. Imagine how angry everyone who cooks would be if some day the government says, “from now on if you share or change a recipe we’re going to call you a pirate. We’re going to compare you with people who attack ships. And we’re going to put you in prison for years, because that’s forbidden cooperation.” Imagine the anger that there would be. That anger is at the basis of the Free

[04:00]

Software Movement too. We want to have freedom in using our computers. So we developed the GNU operating system throughout the 1980s and in 1992 the last missing piece was put in place. That last missing piece is a kernel called Linux. So Linux is not an operating system it is one essential component of the system which is the GNU system plus Linux the GNU / Linux system. And that system now

[04:30]

is used on tens of millions of computers. Jon Hall estimated a 100 million a year or two ago. No one really knows because you see we are all free. Nobody can keep track of what we’re doing that’s part of freedom that nobody knows what’s going on because you don’t have to tell anybody. So today it’s possible to use a computer in freedom. But that doesn’t mean freedom is safe forever. Freedom is

[05:00]

never safe forever. There’s always a danger that you’ll get somebody like George Bush who wants to take it away. Even in the countries like the US which says freedom is what we’re all about that can be turned into mere lip service. Freedoms can be crushed. So for people to have freedom we have to be prepared to defend freedom. And in order to defend our freedom we have to recognize what it means.

[05:30]

That’s the first step. So that’s why I’m here today talking to you about Free Software and the freedoms that it represents freedoms for you. Because that way you will know what your freedom means. And then maybe next year or next decade you will help use defend these freedoms and they may continue. Many people focus on encouraging more users to switch to Free Software. Well, that’s a useful thing to do,

[06:00]

but that alone is not going to bring us to freedoms that endure. If we gave everybody in the world Free Software today but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms then five years from now would they still have Free Software? Probably not, because if they don’t recognize their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall, they’ll let their freedoms slip through their fingers because they won’t bother to close their hands but

[06:30]

they don’t know why. So along with developing Free Software, along with distributing, teaching people to use it, encouraging people to try and switch to it, we have to be constantly teaching these same people why it matters. That it’s not just about how to get powerful convenient software and how to get it as cheap as possible, it’s about how you can live in freedom and be a good neighbor.

[07:00]
So how does this relate to the issue of development? Is Free Software better for development? Well that’s an understatement. Free Software is the only software whose use constitutes development. Because the use of a non-free program is not development, it is electronic colonization. What does it mean if your society increases the use of

[07:30]

non-Free software? Well that software which nobody in your city unless you happen to live in just the right place in the world nobody in you city is in a position to understand it maintain it adapt it extend it or do anything with it. It’s just like the old colonial system where the colonial power had all the industry, they made all the technology and the people in the

[08:00]

colony, they just had to buy it and weren’t supposed to understand anything or make anything they hardly even knew how to fix it. Imagine if you were buying cars and they came from the US and any time they broke you had to ship them back to the US because it’s a secret how they work inside and nobody in your country is allowed to learn how to fix them. That’s what proprietary software is like so this is not sustainable

[08:30]

development. It’s not appropriate technology, this is the technology of dependence. And dependence is exactly what that system is all about. It’s keeping people helpless. Another feature of the old, colonial system was divide and rule. Set people against each other don’t allow them to cooperate because that makes it easier to keep all of them in subjection. Now dividing

[09:00]
people and subjugating them is not just a minor side aspect of proprietary software it is what makes it proprietary software. The license says you are forbidden to share it with anyone, and you can’t get the source code so you don’t know what’s inside it so you can’t control it. Divided and subjugated. That’s the nature of proprietary software. Of course the system comes out looking like the colonial system. Another feature you might remember from the colonial system was that the colonial power would recruit a local elite, a few local people, like maybe the nobles or whoever and pit one tribe against another or they would create tribes if there weren’t tribes so they can massacre each other decades later. So the local elite, they would get certain privileges and in return they would help keep everybody else

[10:00]

down. Well you can see that today, some proprietary software companies actively recruit local elites. They set up a software development center in your country and the people who work there who are part of the local elite or they do some favors for local politicians secretly or for the government openly but it doesn’t make any difference which one either way they are buying influence in the government, converting that government

[10:30]

from a sovereign state into their local overseer of their empire whose job is to make sure everybody else becomes dependent on the same non-Free software. They say to schools, “we will help you by giving you these gratis copies of our non-Free software, so that you can turn your students into addicts of our software”. Why do I use the term addicts because

[11:00]

they develop a dependency on this software and then after they graduate you can be sure they are not going to be offered these gratis copies any more. Because it’s only the first dose that’s gratis. Once you’re addicted then you’re supposed to pay and also of course these companies whose graduates work for , those companies are not going to be offered gratis copies. So what essentially these developers, these software companies are doing is they are recruiting the schools

[11:30]

into agents to lead people into permanent, life-long dependency. These are things that the Open Source movement usually doesn’t talk about, that’s why I don’t support Open Source. Open Source is a way of promoting software that usually is Free but without mentioning these ideals. These issues of freedom. They’re left in the background. Open Source people usually talk only

[12:00]

about practical value, how do you get powerful convenient software and how much will it cost. Well Free Software probably allows you to save money too if you’re not being forced to pay for permission to use it you can probably save money. But I think that’s a secondary issue. Even in poor countries, freedom is important. We should never start saying well they’re so poor freedom doesn’t matter all they need is bread and circuses. Which they

[12:30]

had here once upon a time. And then they shouldn’t even think about being free. I think freedom is important in every country and every society whether it is rich or poor. Nonetheless, people who support Open Source often contribute to extending the Free Software community. Many of them develop Free Software. Those are useful contributions. I am not saying what they do is bad. I am saying that by itself it is not enough,

[13:00]

because it’s weak. You see, when you say the goal is to have powerful, reliable, convenient software and get it cheaply then it becomes possible for the representatives of proprietary software to say, “well we claim that we’ll deliver you more powerful, reliable software. We claimed that our total cost of ownership will be cheaper.” And I think they’re usually bullshit. When Microsoft says this it’s based on distorted facts.

[13:30]

But it’s weak. But when we say the goal is to live in freedom and to be allowed to cooperated with other people in a community, they can’t say they’re going to offer us more of that cheaper. Because they don’t offer that at all. They’re not even competing with us. They’re out of the running. Once you decide you want to live in freedom, they are out of the running. So, we are trying to help you reach

[14:00]

freedom in a community. They are trying to subjugate you, but they’ll say they’ll get you there faster. And maybe they would. …

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channels: Come and chat with us in real time

New to This Site? Here Are Some Introductory Resources

No

Mono

ODF

Samba logo






We support

End software patents

GPLv3

GNU project

BLAG

EFF bloggers

Comcast is Blocktastic? SavetheInternet.com



Recent Posts