31–40 of 54 posts
I'm not a lawyer, so maybe someone with more expertise could chime in...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s in DOWNLOAD button. How does it not work in EVERY browser? A link would. A form submission would. Ultra simple JavaScript would. It’s not a question of “why doesn’t chrome work“ but more a question of “how is this even an issue“.
In this case I agree with you. I was just pointing out that we should be careful with Chrome being used as a "reference".
I’m really tired of people declaring other browsers “broken“ because they don’t implement the future-of-the-minute that chrome has already added.
I am downloading this dataset. It will take about 40 days, is my guess....
I am downloading this dataset. It will take about 40 days, is my guess....
How would one go about creating a torrent for it? Or uploading to IPFS?
The problem here is that both of your suggestions involve a 2-step process:
1. Download the file
2. Create a torrent from it, or upload it to IPFS
Since step 1 is already a 2TB download, getting to either version of step 2 is untenable. I agree with one of the other posters in this thread, the default for something like this should be torrent since you get both distribution and checksumming for free.
It would also be nice if it wasn't a 2TB zip file, which then has to be unzipped onto another 2TB of storage for practical use.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s in DOWNLOAD button. How does it not work in EVERY browser? A link would. A form submission would. Ultra simple JavaScript would. It’s not a question of “why doesn’t chrome work“ but more a question of “how is this even an issue“.
It's a really big download (1.8TB). One where both you and they would be really rather perturbed if the download failed at 90%. In fact, they'd probably be perturbed by the bandwidth costs even if everyone who wanted the dataset was only downloading it once. Maybe it uses WebTorrent? (Not sure why it couldn't just fall back to giving you a .torrent file in that case, though.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Why Open Source misses the point of Free Software" by Richard Stallman > When we call software “free,” we mean that it respects the users' essential freedoms: the freedom to run it, to study and change it, and to redistribute copies with or without changes. This is a matter of freedom, not price, so think of “free speech,” not “free beer.” https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point....
There's a lot of interesting history between the Open Source and Free Software movements, and this is a valuable view of one side of the story. I'd recommend it for people who are interested, though I hope they would also seek out the other side. However, we're going off topic here. The self-driving download is neither Open Source nor Free Software.
In case you don't want to register and are curious about some metadata: Videos: 100K video clips: Size:1.8TB Info: The GPS/IMU information recorded along with the videos: Size: 3.9GB Images It has two subfolders. 1) 100K labeled key frame images extracted from the videos at 10th second 2) 10K key frames for full-frame semantic segmentation.: Size: 6.5GB Labels: Annotations of road objects, lanes, and drivable areas i…
This is nice, but it assumes that grinding on lots of successful driving video is a valid path to automatic driving.