The domain registration date doesn’t tell anything about the amount of effort put in it. I usually register the domains of my side-projects only when I’m at 80% done; otherwise I would buy dozens of domains I would never use.
If you want to help orgs who have come to the conclusion they need to diversify to EU services, it does not mean you have to have come to the same conclusion! Also, it's not the same kind of dependency if you get or buy something one-off from a website like this, as if you build your org on top of a single platform/jurisdiction.
They didn’t explicitly point to hypocrisy as the thing that makes it “unserious.” Actually I think a lot of serious projects are a little bit hypocritical, a little bit of hypocrisy is often the cost of contact with reality.
In this case it isn’t even clear where the hypocrisy comes from, though. It’s a service for looking up other services. Does it even handle any PII?
The domain registration in this context is just proof that the website doesn't have any community value. As for the amount of effort, I took a look at the HTML source of the page, and it looks like the person who released it doesn't really understand the technology he uses, even on a website level.
My opinion is therefore that this amount of effort is not nearly enough to hold our discussion here.
Most Linux kernel development is done by people affiliated with US companies, often by employees on company time. Linus moved to the US a long time ago, and the Linux Foundation is based in the US.
Being "technology" doesn’t make something interesting. A writeup of the author about their work would have been interesting, but they haven’t even published the code nor written anything about it.
> There's not even any real political message here.
Of course there is, it’s right there in the title of the website. Even making a website to remember these deaths and not other ones is a political choice.
I don’t know if I would say I don’t “care” about the license. I want to respect the FFmpeg license, and considering that my project is a straight ripoff, it would be dishonest to not have the same license. Whether AI-generated code can even be legally licensed or copyrighted is a separate question that hasn’t been decided by courts. I’ll happily comply with whatever experts recommend.
Good answer. Asking an AI coding agent to port a C codebase to Rust is clearly and obviously creating a derivative work. You need to follow the terms of the LGPL license, and your Rust fork of FFMPEG must be licensed as LGPL. Videolan holds the copyright to FFMPEG, and that includes derivative works. LGPL allows you to do exactly what you're doing.
Note that if you convert x264, x265 or any of the other GPL v2 libraries, your Rust version of those libraries will be GPL v2. When builds of FFMPEG are created with GPL v2 libraries, the entire build becomes GPL v2 (which has a more restrictive copyleft provision than LGPL).
Good to know! I have licensed as LGPL so I think that covers it. Rewriting x264 and x265 are in scope so I’ll keep that in mind. I will design the application as well so that those can easily be excluded from compilation to get a pure LGPL build.
I suppose “review” is misleading, since I’m not actually reading the code, I’m simply asking Claude to explain what the code is doing. I’ll change that so it’s expressly clear that none of this code is actually human-reviewed.
These things may not be true in the future. I just meant to describe the current state of the project. With Rust being a modern language and the repository being AI-optimized, I wouldn't be surprised if it grew to have more features. And I hope that Rust can close the gap on performance, it would be a great testament to Rust's usefulness for high performance software.
reply