ThrowAway237s

Er hat viele Videos aus dieser Zeit entfernt. Hat jemand von euch damals Videos von KuchenTV gesichert, insbesondere aus den Miguel Pablo/HeracAy-Zeiten?

Shazam, and by extension anything that relies on it (like Aha-music), can only list one result.

This leads to the problem where Shazam doesn't find the original instrumental track, but other media that used it as background music.

Examples that can be tested include "The Midnight - Collateral" matching "BrookHoliday - Paper Guns" and "Wayne Jones - Mr. Sunny Face" matching the video "Bad Money" by Mark Angel comedy, because it used this as background music.

Does anyone know a sound search engine that matches multiple results?

I predict that social media services in most countries and all first-world countries will be government-owned by 2060, like it is in China today.

Date: 2060.

Evidence: See what China did with WeChat ().

In September 2016, German YouTuber KuchenTV (Tim Heldt) who at that time had over 450K subscribers (now over a million) published a satire video titled "10 unglaubliche Orte wo keiner/kaum einer war ft. TrollwutTV", which translates into "10 incredible places where no one/almost no one has been ft. TrollwutTV". Even though its view count was in the six digits, it is lost media now.

It is listed in . The thumbnail is an auto-generated stock photo used in the video. .

The video ID was QOuDVjYV1GE (). It is indicated as private, not removed for terms of service violations, so it was him who took it down, but likely involuntarily. The most plausible reason he took it down was that he got frightened of getting striked on old videos after his channel and other channels like "OPEN MIND" (discussion about drugs) were temporarily terminated in 2018 (reinstated shortly after), so as a precautionary measure, he took down lots of old videos with edgy humor that could even remotely be considered offensive. ()

For reference, strikes on old videos are what lead to the termination of Mumkey Jones later that year, and Mumkey was not reinstated.

"10 unglaubliche Orte ..." is the first video he published after his video titled "Miguel Pablos Beerdigung" (translated "Miguel Pablos funeral", later retitled to "Bye Bye Miguel Pablo!", a video against Miguel Pablo as the title suggests), one of his most viewed videos ever, and . 2016 was the year where KuchenTV rose to popularity, so I am convinced someone out there has a copy of "10 unglaubliche Orte ..." as well.

At 50M or 64M high resolutions (depending on device), it only lets you select automatic flash. What is the point of this restriction? It seems completely arbitrary and unreasonable.

In comparison, Xiaomi allows manual flash at high resolution, and even continuous light, which Samsung doesn't have at all in photo mode. But to Samsung's credit, they have added the ability to turn the light on and off during (not just before) a video recording, which Xiaomi does not have.

Smartphone video cameras have had a long history of struggling with high frame rates. They reached higher pixels per second by increases in video resolution rather than frame rate.

For example, the earliest 4K 2160p 30fps video recording smartphones were released in 2013, starting with the Galaxy Note 3. (Note: The Acer Liquid S2 had only 24fps and the same chipset as the Note 3, but I am taking the Note 3 as example due to my familiarity with the Samsung product lineage).

The same amount of unencoded data per second as 2160p 30fps would be accomplished with 1080p at 120fps, yet the Note 3 and several Samsung smartphones released thereafter could only record 1080p at 60fps. 120fps was only possible at 720p, so some kind of bottleneck prevented them from recording 1080p at 120fps.

The 1080p 60fps limitation stayed all the way until the S9 (2018) suddenly quadrupled the frame rate to 240fps. The 60fps were proably not a processing limitation, because from my testing, pre-2016 Samsung smartphones were perfectly capable of playing back 1080p 120fps and 720p 240fps video with no lag (original speed, not slowed down).

Yes, I know, playing (decoding) takes less processing power than recording (encoding), but I don't see how 1080p 120fps would be more difficult to process than 2160p at 30fps. They are the same number of pixels per second. 248,832,000 to be exact.

So my closest guess is that it has something to do with the image sensor.

From what I understand, video capture resolution is limited by two things: image sensor resolution and frame buffer size.

This means a 4K 120fps capable image sensor can not capture 8K at 30fps (same data rate) if it lacks the number of pixels (7680x4320 minimum), and the device can not encode 8K video if its GPU has too small of a frame buffer size to hold 7680×4320×8×3 bits of data (width × height × bits per pixel × number of color channels, R G B). The frame buffer needs to be at least large enough to hold a single uncompressed frame.

So what is it that bottlenecks the video recording frame rate of smartphone cameras?

Why can't every smartphone, or other video camera for that matter, that can record in 2160p at 30fps also record in 1080p at 120fps? In other words, why can't resolution be proportionally traded in for frame rate?

I hereby release this post into the public domain, CC0 1.0.

(All URLs removed. Markdown version with URLs: pastebin/w9r89N7g. Sorry, but I am not about to spend half an hour to figure out which link causes this post to be auto-detected as spam. All these links are valid evidence that support my prediction.)

Google Chrome, at least its mobile version, will probably give website operators the ability to prevent their pages from being downloaded and screen captured.

In the recent years, Google "Don't be evil", also known as "Web Environment Integrity company", has made major anti-control and anti-ownership decisions, most notably planning to remove the ability to install APKs by developers not personally identified and approved by Google and excusing it with the usual "protection" coroprate doublespeak fairy tale that, as always, fools most people, so this is not ouside the realm of possibility.

Given that "Don't be evil" controls most of the web browsing market share, they can do some real damage there as well. In 2023, "Don't be evil" hallucinated something up, naming it the "Web Environment Integrity API", which would have taken away lots of freedom from end users. But they graciously decided to step down with it. But the same can't be said about SafetyNet / Play Integrity API. And they take down YouTube videos criticizing it.

"Don't be evil" is also opposed to the idea of people owning permanent local copies of YouTube videos and also lets Android app developers arbitrarily disable screen capture.

Since 2018, "Don't be evil" Chrome on Android blocks screen capture in incognito mode, even though there are valid reasons for it like testing and documenting how a website appears to first-time visitors.

If When "Don't be evil" implements a download blocking anti-feature, it will probably be an HTTP header like allow-downloading: false and allow-screen-capture: false, or some euphemistic (good-sounding) name that hides the real meaning, like "flag secure", which they use for screenshot blocking on Android. And they will tell the usual familiar-sounding "it's to protect everyone's privacy" fairy tale.

Or their marketing department will frame it as "we give website owners more control over what happens with their content" or something like that, similarly to what they did with scrolling ("Take control of your scroll") after they enforced pull-to-refresh upon everyone by taking away the ability to turn it off.

If I can think of it, they must have thought of it long ago. "Don't be evil" executives won't rest easy until they have eroded away the last bit of user freedom. All that is holding them back from adding download blocking at this point is probably that it is easier to switch web browsers than operating systems. Installing an Android alternative like LineageOS requires an unlocked bootloader and significant technical knowledge, whereas installing Firefox or Brave browser is no big deal, at least for now.

The plain and simple reality is, if someone doesn't want their content preserved by others, they should not put it onto a visible spot on the Internet in the first place. It has been this way all the way since the beginning of the Internet.

So if you're a Chrome user, know this: Your ability to store local copies of any page you want is probably on borrowed time. Don't take it for granted.

Date: before 2030. Evidence: more than enough. See above.

I hereby release this post into the public domain, CC0 1.0.

Google Chrome, at least its mobile version, will probably give website operators the ability to prevent their pages from being downloaded and screen captured.

In the recent years, Google "Don't be evil", also known as "Web Environment Integrity company", has made major anti-control and anti-ownership decisions, most notably and excusing it with that, as always, fools most people, so this is not ouside the realm of possibility.

Given that "Don't be evil" controls most of the web browsing market share, they can do some real damage there as well. In 2023, "Don't be evil" hallucinated something up, naming it the "", which would have taken away lots of freedom from end users. But they graciously decided to step down with it. But the same can't be said about SafetyNet / Play Integrity API. And .

"Don't be evil" is also and also lets Android app developers arbitrarily .

Since 2018, "Don't be evil" Chrome on Android , even though there are valid reasons for it like testing and documenting how a website appears to first-time visitors.

If When "Don't be evil" implements a download blocking anti-feature, it will probably be an HTTP header like allow-downloading: false and allow-screen-capture: false, or some euphemistic (good-sounding) name that hides the real meaning, like "flag secure", which they use for . And they will tell the usual "it's to protect everyone's privacy" fairy tale.

Or their marketing department will frame it as "we give website owners more control over what happens with their content" or something like that, similarly to what they did with scrolling ("") after they by taking away the ability to turn it off.

If I can think of it, they must have thought of it long ago. "Don't be evil" executives won't rest easy until they have eroded away the last bit of user freedom. All that is holding them back from adding download blocking at this point is probably that it is easier to switch web browsers than operating systems. Installing an Android alternative like LineageOS requires an unlocked bootloader and significant technical knowledge, whereas installing Firefox or Brave browser is no big deal, at least for now.

The plain and simple reality is, if someone doesn't want their content preserved by others, they should not put it onto a visible spot on the Internet in the first place. It has been this way all the way since the beginning of the Internet.

So if you're a Chrome user, know this: Your ability to store local copies of any page you want is probably on borrowed time. Don't take it for granted.

Date: before 2030. Evidence: more than enough. See above.

I hereby release this post into the public domain, .

To cut off students from the outside world / their parents, it has to be ensured that they do not smuggle communication devices can be smuggled in, while teachers freely show each other social media clips on their phones (happened during my school time).

Smartphones are neutral pocket-sized computers. They can be used for productive puporses or otherwise. If smartphones are so distracting, teachers shouldn't have them either. Teachers use the same social media they say distracts students.

Another reason is to prevent students from contacting their parents when teachers engage in bullying.

Date: 2030-2035.

Evidence: None, but it is plausible. "Public" schools (meaning government-backed) will have no trouble funding it. I wouldn't be surprised.

The "Disk Usage Analyzer" tool, formerly known as Baobab, used to support multiple windows. This allowed the user to look at the results of a scan while a different scan is running in background, and allowed having multiple scan results open without having to close any existing results.

But at some point, its developers made it so that trying to start a second instance will instead bring the existing window into the foreground.

There is no need for a single-session limitation for Baobab. On some other software like Firefox, multiple instances would interfere with each other in the profile folder, and Firefox has a tabbed and multi-windowed user interface anyway.

But on Baobab, there are no such restrictions.

So what is the purpose of a single-session limitation?

We have changed the rules. Self-promotion was completely outruled by the prior moderation team, but we decided to allow it in the comments if it adds value to a discussion and in this megathread.

Here, you can promote your own channel and also someone else's channel if you like.

Louis Rossmann likes to use the phrase "death by a thousand cuts". I have created this timeline of major anti-consumer decisions that accumulated over time. My post is in the public domain under , so you can copy and paste it all you like.

• 2003: Apple iPod with non-replaceable battery. Thankfully roasted by Casey Neistat. Little did the people know back then, this horror would be the norm in mobile phones in little more than over a decade.

• 2007: Apple releases iPhone without replaceable battery or MicroSD support. Back then, the back cover could still be opened with little effort, but in the following years, "little efford" turned into a glue seal. "Unibody", ugh.

• 2010: iPhone 4 introduces "fasionable premium" fragile glass backs to the smartphone world. No technical/practical benefits.

• 2011, 2012: Mass storage access (including for MicroSD) gradually removed from Android by Google and vendors. There are understandable technical restrictions for internal storage (see ), but that doesn't justify also removing it for MicroSD, where there are no such restrictions.

• 2013: Sony and HTC jump on non-replaceable battery bandwagon with Xperia Z and HTC One M7.

• 2014: Android 4.4 forcibly disables write access to MicroSD cards for all user-installed apps including file managers "for our protection". No opt-out besides rooting. The were poor.

• 2014: Around that time, laptops started having batteries that can not be externally removed, only with screws opening the complete bottom part, which also exposes other parts.

• 2015: Samsung releases Galaxy S6. No MicroSD and no user-replaceable battery. Broken phone? All data gone. Don't like slow charging? Too bad, your battery will die quickly. But hey, it allows for a !

• 2016: Android 6.0 introduces "adopted storage" feature for MicroSD cards, defeating all benefits (modularity, external data recovery, immediate reuse in new device). Thankfully just optional, but I bet my _rse Google would love to have it mandatory.

• 2016 (Android 6.0):

• 2016: Apple removes 3.5mm headphone plug because it is "old-fasioned" (if "new"/"modern" means less freedom, I prefer "old").

• 2017: LG joins non-replaceable battery bandwagon with their G6 smartphone.

• 2017 (Android 7.0): Read access to USB-On-The-Go devices disabled entirely through the main storage API.

• 2018 (Android 9.0): Granting permissions to apps from outside the Google Play Store (through APK files) requires restarting the app for each permission.

• 2018 (Android 9.0): Call recording disabled for user-installed apps. , .

• 2019: . Certain access requires approval by Google "to protect us".

• May 2019: Malfunction in the Mozilla Firefox "add-on signing" (Microsoft-resembling tyranny that exists "to protect users") forcibly disables all extensions.

• 2019: iPhone 12 locks out "unofficial"/"non-genuine" replacement parts. Operating system refuses to boot upon detection of such.

• 2020: The typical laptop has a non-replaceable battery and no proper full-sized SD card slot, only difficult-to-handle and lower-capacity MicroSD. Also lacks write protection switch. (Mounting as read-only depends on a functioning file system driver, which often does not work: , .).

• circa 2020: Xiaomi violates a sacred consumer right by forcing a one-week wait before users are able to unlock the bootloader. Ideally, Xiaomi would be banned like Huawei until they stop this abuse.

• 2021:

• 2021: Galaxy S21 without MicroSD after it was brought back with the S7 in 2016.

• 2021: Windows 11 and TPM ("trusted" platform module). Microsoft: "no, you can't use non-Microsoft operating systems".

• 2022: Android 12 restricts battery statistics.

• 2022: Firefox performeance analysis tool is moved to an online service, meaning it can have downtimes and be deprecated. ("New: Firefox Profiler is now integrated into Developer Tools. […] For a limited time, you can access the original Performance panel via Advanced settings"). What's next?.

• 2022: Android 13

• 2022: Android 13 imposes .

• 2023: Samsung starts serializing batteries with the Galaxy S23, calling replacements "unauthorized".

• 2023: Play Store starts requiring real-life identification for developers. Phew, thank god they don't do the same thing for APKs. Or....?

• 1984 2025: Google announces that starting with Android 17, only APKs created by developers manually approved by Google will be able to run on Android devices with Google Play services. Requesting approval requires disclosing real-life identification to Google. This defeats the whole benefit of APK files: being able to run software on your device, your property, that big corporations want to block you (or how they call it, "protect you") from.

I hereby release this post into the public domain, CC0 1.0.

At this point, Google is probably just resisting the temptation to take the same step that Microsoft has taken with Windows 11 and Apple had implemented on iOS a long time ago.

After all the restrictions they have added to Android OS in the recent years, this doesn't seem too far off anymore.

Not to mention, they by restricting APK installations to only apps by developers who have provided real-life identification to Google and have been approved by Google.

This restriction defeats the whole point of APKs: Being able to run software on your smartphone, your property, without corporate gatekeepers being able to block you (or how they would name it, "protect you") from it.

APKs also allow installing and distributing old versions of apps and apps taken down from the store, a famous example for which is Flappy Bird.

It seems Google is on a mission to turn Android OS into a glorified twin brother of iOS.

Date: Optimistically, 2028.

Evidence: Already above.

I hereby release this post into the public domain, CC0 1.0.

TLDR: The first 8K video recording smartphones came out in 2020. I doubt mid-range smartphones will get it before 2027.

I have observed that mid-range smartphones got the same video recording capabilities more than 5 years later than flagships. Mid-range smartphone series get video resolution increases suspiciously late. It wasn't always like this.

Obviously, you'd expect mid-rangers to get video resolution increases later than flagships, but in recent years the delays have grown suspiciously large. I have a slight suspicion this is deliberate.

4320p (8K)

The first 4320p 8K video recording smartphones came out in 2020, the Xiaomi Mi 10 Pro and the Samsung Galaxy S20. It's been 5 years and Samsung's current upper mid-range phone, the A56, is still at 2160p.

The image sensor of the A56 has enough width and height for 8K video frame, but 8K also requires capturing and processing enormous amounts of data in a short time, requiring more expensive components. My closest guess is that there is simply a lack of need for it. People who pay for non-flagships use a device for ordinary tasks like web browsing and messaging.

2160p (4K) 30fps

The flagship smartphones of the biggest Android smartphone manufacturer, Samsung, first had 4K 2160p and 1080p 60fps video recording capabilities in 2013, with the Galaxy Note 3.

However, it took until 2018 for 2160p to arrive at their mid-range phone series, with the Galaxy A9 2018 - over 5 years later. Until then, it was 1080p at 30fps and nothing more.

I understand that flagship smartphone series would get these abilities before mid-range series, but 7 years is a suspiciously long delay. So long that I suspect they are deliberately withholding it from their mid-rangers, given that cameras are a major selling point of smartphones, so they want people to pay up if they want the high video recording capabilities.

1080p 60fps

For 1080p 60fps, it strangely took even longer. Given that 1080p at 60fps has only half the pixel rate (resolution multiplied by framerate) as 2160p at 30fps, it seems easier to implement, which makes its late implementation especially strange.

Samsung's first mid-ranger to get it was the Galaxy A52, from 2021! If this isn't due to technical limitations, I feel they simply forgot to add the button to their camera UI.

2160p 60fps

Their flagships got 2160p at 60fps first in 2018 with the S9 (the same year they upgraded their mid-rangers to 2160p 30fps), yet their mid-rangers still haven't got it in 2025, seven years later. Samsung's highest-end mid-ranger, the A56, still records 2160p at only 30 fps. 60fps should be doable in the mid range by now.

Apple's mid-rangers (iPhone SE) actually had 2160p 60fps in 2020, and Xiaomi in 2022 (Poco F4). Therefore I have a sense that Samsung is deliberately withholding it from their mid-range.

1080p 240fps

The 1080p framerate limit was suddenly bumped from 60fps to 240fps with the Galaxy S9, which makes me wonder if 1080p 120fps wasn't already possible with the S8. How can the framerate limit simply quadruple from one year to the next? It's not like smartphone processors got 4 times as powerful between 2017 and 2018.

1080p 120fps is the same amount of data per second as 2160p 30fps which was already possible in 2013, so it was either an image sensor limitation or Samsung simply forgot about it.

Apple was an early adopter of 1080p at 120fps, with the iPhone 6s. So it was possible with the technology that existed in 2015. But it took Samsung until 2018 to increase the 1080p framerate limit to anything beyond 60.

1080p at 30fps

In the early 2010s, it took only two additional years for 1080p to arrive in the mid-range. The Galaxy S2 (flagship) first had it in 2011, and the mid-ranger to have it first was the S4 mini, 2013. (I don't count the Sony Xperia Z1 compact as a mid-ranger due to it having similar hardware as the regular Z1.)

Still photography

(I know, megapixels aren't everything, and I address this further down.)

Funnily, photography capabilities of today's mid-range smartphones exceed those of 2018 flagships, at least in daylight.

In the early 2010s, flagship smartphones started leaving the single-digit megapixel reign (Xperia S, Galaxy S4, ...), but stayed under 20 megapixels for a long time.

It is not uncommon to see high-resolution photo cameras (50 megapixels, 64 megapixels, 108 megapixels) in mid-level and even entry-level smartphones (Galaxy A12 and above), while 2018 flagship phones were still in the sub-20 megapixel reign.

Apple and Samsung were at 12 megapixels and Huawei was just starting to tap into the "high-megapixel regime" (Huawei P20 Pro with 40 megapixels).

"Megapixels aren't everything!" shouts the expert. Yes, I know that, and I have also watched "The Megapixel Myth As Fast As Possible" by Techquickie, but still, in daylight photography where pixel sizes matter less, today's mid-range phone easily beats a 2018 flagship phone. It's just video where today's mid-ranger lags behind. And for lower light, there's pixel binning.

I hereby release the text of this post into the public domain, CC0 1.0.

is a YouTube channel with mainly tests with Microsoft Windows.

He published his video "What if you replace Explorer.exe with Calculator on EVERY Windows Version?" on October 16th and already took it down. It contained what the title says. Has anyone rescued it?

Do you know any other place I could ask? Datastream has no subreddit.

Original URL:

I don't get what the big deal with "necroposting" is and why people are so bothered by it.

A helpful response is a helpful response. If something adds value, it should be posted. Simple as that.

Sam Tucker (SAMTIME) is a comedian who makes parodies of tech company spokespeople excusing their anti-consumer practices.

In the video "Android is losing a big feature" (video ID dfccCB2Vz-M), Sam used his comedic style to step on Google's decision to restrict "sideloading" (APK installation), one of the primary selling points of Android smartphones over Apple iPhones. He also exposed how Play Integrity API restricts freedom.

That was too much for YouTube and they took it down. But you can find it outside of YouTube if you look for it.

The freedom afforded by "sideloading" allows people to use applications not available in the Play Store. Some types of apps are not allowed by Google, for example YouTube downloaders that would compete with YouTube's paid premium subscription, but can also be taken down by their author. A famous example is Flappy Bird.

Thanks to APK files, Android users could play Flappy Bird even after its author took it down from the Play Store, while iPhone users were out of luck and had to resort to using garbage web-based remakes that require Internet connection.

Another use for "sideloading" is to go back to older versions of apps. Sometimes, updates make things worse. APK files allow installing and distributing older versions that are superior. One such example was ES File Explorer. It turned into adware but APK files allowed installing pre-adware versions.

• Edit 2025-10-28: Added video ID.

I hereby release this post into the public domain under CC0 1.0.

From what I understand, 7z can do everything the others can do, so what is the point of having those separate editions?

In June 2016, Instagram changed their API in a way that restricted access to third-party search engines and web viewers.

This was bad because back then, Instagram's built-in searching capabilities were severely limited. You could only search user names and single hash tags, but not more advanced things like descriptions, multiple hashtags, and date ranges. I don't know if they added it by now because I haven't used Instagram for several years.

Third-party tools like Hashtag Pirate had searching capabilities well beyond Instagram's built-in searching tool. From what I remember, Hashtag Pirate allowed filtering by type (photo or video) and date range, and allowed filtering by multiple hashtags. There was also a search engine which could search descriptions but I don't remember its name.

Third-party viewers like Websta.me, Enjoygram (later renamed to Pikore), InstaGravity, Instaliga (the few I remember), Gramfeed, Mixagram (mentioned in Mac Rumors article) also were usually more lightweight than Instagram's own website, therefore working more smoothly on older devices. Instagram's own website always relied on heavy JavaScript and consumed lots of memory.

Some also showed details about a post that were not shown by the Instagram website, like the exact date a post was uploaded. Instagram itself used to show "weeks ago" only, but they added exact dates in the late 2010s I think.

Third-party viewers also featured different layouts that may be preferrable to Instagram's own web interface. For example, Websta.me had a side-by-side view, meaning it used to show pictures on the left column and description+comments on the right column, and you could change the view ( I found in the archives).

The API was also used by bulk exporting tools like InstaPort.me, which also ceased to work.

I hereby release this post into the public domain under .

Recently, a friend of mine had a "disliked videos" playlist removed from his channel for allegedly endangering children, even though it contains nothing that would endanger children.

The channel has no videos and was purely used for commenting and playlists.

If all playlists must be child-friendly, they would also need to remove all sexual education playlists and many music video playlists, including every playlist with "Wrecking Ball" in it. Funnily enough, Wrecking Ball appeared in Rewind 2013.

It seems any kind of public disliking is unwelcome on YouTube. They removed the public dislike count and they made clear they want no dislike playlists either.

For whichever reason, YouTube does not like people having local copies of videos. From YouTube help center article 3037019:

In order to protect the YouTube community, we may prevent signed-out users from accessing YouTube videos when they’re attempting to download material for offline use.

Protect against what? What's wrong with offline use?

They word it as if it is a nefarious thing to do. In fact, they should be glad about it because it saves them bandwidth. If people watch from a local file rather than streaming from YouTube each time, it reduces the server usage at YouTube.

YouTube Premium members are graciously allowed to store videos on their devices for 29 days, after which they are forcibly deleted. The videos are stored in a locked-in location inaccessible from file managers and in a proprietary format that is unplayable by anything besides the YouTube app.

At the end of the video "Google is locking down Android" by Mental Outlaw, he explains that there are legitimate reasons for having local copies of videos, such as an extended period with no Internet access, using Creative Commons media, and preserving history.

YouTube lets people publish original content under a Creative Commons license that explicitly allows reuse, yet does not want people to download the same. They also don't allow videos mentioning any tools for saving videos. (Example: video ID xkyqFiUrhTc.)

My closest guess is that YouTube wants to force people to watch advertisements or pay for YouTube premium.

When YouTube ceases operations, lots of Internet history will be destroyed.

Quote by Karl Voit:

Whenever I tell people that we need to plan for the day when YouTube goes offline, I mostly receive weird reactions. It seems to be the case that people can't think of YouTube being gone. Unfortunately, I'm convinced that most people will face the day when we lose this enormous library of videos.

(No URLs due to possible spam filtering.)

I hereby release this post into the public domain under CC0 1.0. Quotes excluded.

# MonthFolders: organizes files by monthly directories. CC0 1.0 public domain.

filecount=$(find -maxdepth 1 -type f |wc -l)
if [ $filecount -eq 0 ]; then
	echo "This directory contains no files."
	return 1; # close script because nothing to do.
fi

startyear=$(find -maxdepth 1 -type f -printf '%TY\n' |sort |head -n 1)
endyear=$(find -maxdepth 1 -type f -printf '%TY\n' |sort |tail -n 1)
yearcount=0 # initialize variable
yearcount=$startyear


if [ $filecount -eq 1 ]; then
	echo "This directory contains one file from the year $startyear."
elif [ $startyear -eq $endyear ]; then
	echo "This directory contains $filecount files from the year $startyear."
else
	echo "This directory contains $filecount files between the years $startyear and $endyear."
fi
	
while [ $yearcount -le $endyear ]; do
	# skip years with no files
	while [ $(find -maxdepth 1 -type f -newermt $yearcount-01-01 -not -newermt $((yearcount+1))-01-01 |wc -l) -eq 0 ] && [ $yearcount -lt $endyear ]; do
		yearcount=$(($yearcount+1));
	done
	
	printf "Organizing files from $yearcount..." # later completed with "Done."
	month_processed=1 # reset to January
	while [ $month_processed -le 11 ]; do
	# pad 0-9 with zero.
		monthcount=$month_processed
		nextmonth=$(($month_processed+1));
		if [ $month_processed -eq 9 ]; then monthcount=09; fi
		if [ $month_processed -lt 9 ]; then 
			monthcount=$(printf 0$monthcount);
			nextmonth=$(printf 0$nextmonth);
		fi 
		count_files_in_month=$(find -maxdepth 1 -type f -newermt $yearcount-$monthcount-01 -not -newermt $yearcount-$nextmonth-01 |wc -l)
		# Only create directory if files from that month actually exist.
		if [ $count_files_in_month -gt 0 ]; then
			printf " $monthcount"
			if [ ! -d "$yearcount-$monthcount" ]; then mkdir "$yearcount-$monthcount"; fi
			find -maxdepth 1 -type f -newermt $yearcount-$monthcount-01 -not -newermt $yearcount-$nextmonth-01 -exec mv -n "{}" "$yearcount-$monthcount" \;;
		fi
		month_processed=$(($month_processed+1));
	done
	# Separate code for December because there is no thirteenth month.
	count_files_in_month=$(find -maxdepth 1 -type f -newermt $yearcount-12-01 -not -newermt $(($yearcount+1))-01-01 |wc -l)
	if [ $count_files_in_month -gt 0 ]; then
		printf " 12"
		if [ ! -d "$yearcount-12" ]; then mkdir "$yearcount-12"; fi
		find -maxdepth 1 -type f -newermt $yearcount-12-01 -not -newermt $(($yearcount+1))-01-01 -exec mv -n "{}" "$yearcount-12" \;;
	fi
	
	printf " Done.\n"
	yearcount=$(($yearcount+1));
done

Pretty much all large VPN providers (Nord VPN, Express VPN, Private Internet Access, ...) have excluded their public-facing websites from archival.

It's not like their company websites contain any private information. It's mostly blog posts and help pages. What is it that bothers them about having their public company websites archived?

exFAT by Microsoft is the successor of FAT32. Its primary improvement is that it gets rid of the 4 GiB file size limit.

But a cross-platform file system without 4 GiB limit already existed, the Universal Disk Format (UDF). UDF doesn't just work on optical discs but also flash storage and hard disks.

exFAT was patent-encumbered until Microsoft graciously lifted it in 2019, so why didn't the camera industry just agree on UDF and cut Microsoft out of the equation?

From my experience, some video cameras simply split video files anyway once they reach 4 GiB, so FAT32 would work just fine, but exFAT was made the default for SD XC (64 GB or more).

It took until the 2020s for exFAT to arrive in stock Android for external storage. How come Google didn't just use UDF for all that time?

UDF (Universal Disk Format) existed before exFAT, was supported cross-platform (Windows + MacOS + Linux), had no patent restrictions, and supports files above 4 GiB. Why not just use that instead of waiting for Microsoft to graciously lift restrictions on exFAT?

Mittelgroßer Komödiant in den 2010ern. Hatte einen ähnlichen Stil wie Julien Bam. Leider sind alle alten Videos weg.

• Kanal:

• Kanal-ID:

Heiko war auch Mitbetreiber von Mitbetreiber von .