Why the fuck are mods still approving "video" files of OLD FLASHES. Why does a jasonafex flash need a video? No, it's not a good fucking idea, it's stupid as shit. People are continuing to post OTHER PEOPLES flashes in video format, WHICH IS BOTH REPOSTING AND POSTING INFERIOR VERSIONS.

It's just really fucking sad that people are being allowed to repost shit that isn't their original work in formats that change an interactive flash into a series of video loops.

And to the people who like it because it lets them view it on their mobile devices I have this to say: GET OVER IT. GET A REAL COMPUTER. I'M CONVINCED THAT IF YOU REALLY HAVE TO VIEW THEM ON YOUR PHONE OR IPOD THEN YOU ARE EITHER TOO YOUNG TO BE ON THIS SITE OR YOU HAVE A PORNOGRAPHY ADDICTION AND NEED TO BE CUT OFF.

I really needed to vent.

Wow, someone needs to take one of these

Jeez, bro.

I'm guessing the "videos" you are talking about are webm files, which have smaller file sizes, and better quality than ripping non-interactive flash videos and uploading them as swfs or gifs.

Also, why do you care? It's not affecting you in the slightest...

ZeroSkyler said:
Why the fuck are mods still approving "video" files of OLD FLASHES. Why does a jasonafex flash need a video? No, it's not a good fucking idea, it's stupid as shit. People are continuing to post OTHER PEOPLES flashes in video format, WHICH IS BOTH REPOSTING AND POSTING INFERIOR VERSIONS.

This sort of thing has been happening with GIF for a long time. Those are definitely inferior versions. Webm is nice, lightweight, fairly compatible and doesn't have the scaling and high CPU issues that flash has.
Flash also really sucks for files that are just a glorified video container. With a video file you can pan through it and select your own scenes. With flash you have to watch and wait and hit replay.

When I see a video posted of a flash I say "oh good, someone posted the webm version, now I can delete the other one".

It's just really fucking sad that people are being allowed to repost shit that isn't their original work in formats that change an interactive flash into a series of video loops.

Does this really affect you that much? Most of the things posted here are by people who aren't posting their original work. It's the nature of the site.

ZeroSkyler said:
And to the people who like it because it lets them view it on their mobile devices I have this to say: GET OVER IT. GET A REAL COMPUTER. I'M CONVINCED THAT IF YOU REALLY HAVE TO VIEW THEM ON YOUR PHONE OR IPOD THEN YOU ARE EITHER TOO YOUNG TO BE ON THIS SITE OR YOU HAVE A PORNOGRAPHY ADDICTION AND NEED TO BE CUT OFF.

Confirmed for IE/Safari user.

But seriously. Put type:webm into your blacklist if you really feel this strongly about this. That way you can pretend they don't exist.

You're pretty much wrong on everything you're trying to contest. Why do we approve the webm versions of previously uploaded flashes? Because the webm version is higher quality and loads faster than a flash file.

For example: Jessica Anner
post #535651 vs post #535958
Webm version is 5.2MB while the flash version is 3.7MB.
So no, webm versions are not inferior.

Also, the forums is not your personal vent dump. Need to take a vent dump? Do it somewhere else.

That's one very unfair comparison, the webm file is twice as large and it's not even the same scene. I would think webm is still the better format since swf is basically a container for the video file itself and from what I know with the same settings they're basically the same quality

ZeroSkyler said:
Why the fuck are mods still approving "video" files of OLD FLASHES.

Because we want to see you suffer.

But seriously, they both serve different purposes, with webm being the format with better potential quality and better support over all browsers and platforms, while flash can be interactive, but also comes with all problems a copyrighted format has, imperfect support across browsers/platforms and security risks are just a few of those.

Also, it's much more comfortable to browse porn on a phone in bed, so don't diss that.

Neitsuke said:
That's one very unfair comparison, the webm file is twice as large and it's not even the same scene. I would think webm is still the better format since swf is basically a container for the video file itself and from what I know with the same settings they're basically the same quality

I was in a rush but my point still stands. Webm is higher quality than flash 

@ TheHuskyK9, parasprite: I'm speaking specifically of interactive flashes, not single loop files. I'm talking about something like
https://e621.net/post/show/604551/2013-abs-adam_wan-alcohol-all_fours-animated-ankle
(that post is fine but im using it as an example for the types of flashes being rendered). A lot of times we see things with 4 or 5 separate webm files for each individual scene which defeats the purpose of having a flash at all initially.

@TheHuskyK9 also you just added to my point. A flash with a size of 3mb and a webm with 5mb. Except it was a flash with multiple perspectives or different speed setting so now it's 4 5mb webm files. 4 Files taking up 4 tabs on a browser, quadrupling the initial bandwidth. Albeit once a webm is fully loaded it no longer requires additional bandwith to load, but then again neither does a flash file.

Also to the people telling me I shouldn't care because it doesn't directly affect me: the boston marathon bombing and university mass shootings didn't directly effect me either, but I still care about that. Not to mention how professional sports don't effect the average person but million's of people care about the superbowl. Don't give me that shit.

NotMeNotYou : thanks for a well thought out and not defensive response, I really respect that. I never considered the copyright constrictions on a flash. That's a good perspective. However isn't that a mute point since we're talking about already made flashes?

ZeroSkyler said:

Also to the people telling me I shouldn't care because it doesn't directly affect me: the boston marathon bombing and university mass shootings didn't directly effect me either, but I still care about that. Not to mention how professional sports don't effect the average person but million's of people care about the superbowl. Don't give me that shit.

No offense, but did you seriously just compare the reposting of porn animations to the boston bombing? I'm not offended or anything but man that is an impressive red herring.

Professional sports are pretty annoying socially though, I'll give you that.

NotMeNotYou : thanks for a well thought out and not defensive response, I really respect that. I never considered the copyright constrictions on a flash. That's a good perspective. However isn't that a mute point since we're talking about already made flashes?

The copyright part has to do with the fact that it is a proprietary format which is copyrighted and thus Adobe has control over what it can be played under. Granted there are a few reverse-engineered flash players that work okay, but it's slightly more complicated. Generally it's better to use a non-proprietary format when possible because it helps prevent vendor lockout. For example, the chat module here uses Java, however they recently changed their signing so that only apps from paid developers will run (unless you manually whitelist it). This basically renders the chat useless until they can find an alternative (or dump ~$200/year to get registered as a developer). Open formats don't have this issue.

parasprite said:
No offense, but did you seriously just compare the reposting of porn animations to the boston bombing?

No I didn't. But you seriously had me sitting here staring at what I wrote for 45 seconds just contemplating whether or not I did. No, I very specifically compared how much either directly affected me (which neither did directly affect me specifically) in order to point out that how much something affects me can't be an argument against why I care. This does imply I care about the bombing btw.

parasprite said:
The copyright part has to do with the fact that it is a proprietary format which is copyrighted and thus Adobe has control over what it can be played under. Granted there are a few reverse-engineered flash players that work okay, but it's slightly more complicated. Generally it's better to use a non-proprietary format when possible because it helps prevent vendor lockout. For example, the chat module here uses Java, however they recently changed their signing so that only apps from paid developers will run (unless you manually whitelist it). This basically renders the chat useless until they can find an alternative (or dump ~$200/year to get registered as a developer). Open formats don't have this issue.

I will be honest, like I said earlier, I really never thought about the copyrights. I have started to understand the point behind it. Could you clarify what you mean by "what it can be played under." Does that entail the browser, device, OS, or a combination of those? The reason I ask is that I remember there was a big stir a few years ago when android announced it would no longer be updating flash player. Although i think I remember them saying it was because flash was no longer relevant.

I do know that something or other happened and i can still use flash on my android for some reason

To be completely honest I have learned some things on this subject. I also feel that I did a very poor job of clarifying what specifically I was angry about in my initial post. I realize I came off very ignorant, and even offensive. I would just like to apologize to TheHuskyK9 and NotMeNotYou about my statements and just say that I in no way was trying to slander the mods in any way. I've done some administration and moderation and I have a lot respect for the amount of shit they put up with on a daily basis, especially on a site like this.

ZeroSkyler said:

I will be honest, like I said earlier, I really never thought about the copyrights. I have started to understand the point behind it. Could you clarify what you mean by "what it can be played under." Does that entail the browser, device, OS, or a combination of those? The reason I ask is that I remember there was a big stir a few years ago when android announced it would no longer be updating flash player. Although i think I remember them saying it was because flash was no longer relevant.

I do know that something or other happened and i can still use flash on my android for some reason

A combination. With an open format like webm you can write a plugin for a browser/video player/OS to play the file independent of any company because you have access to how the file works. With flash, it has to be reverse engineered in order to get support outside of what Adobe gives support for.

Basically Adobe dropped support for Android a few years back, but you can still install it manually from their site (albeit an old version). Additionally I'm pretty sure you can still download it on Google Play, but only if you downloaded it before they dropped support. They also dropped Linux support for browsers not using the "Chrome version" of the plugin. Since it is a proprietary plugin, there isn't a whole lot you can do about it if they drop support.

Dispute webm/gif/swf quality on a case by case basis, not in blanket statements. It can beat gif a lot of the time, and gif loops have been tolerated.

Webms run far smoother than flash animations because they're pre-rendered. Flash has to render each individual frame and run scripts in the background, like a video game, and this can significantly slow down performance on weaker machines.

I would personally rather watch a webm than a flash animation, even if it meant a larger file size or a loss of quality.