Open up an Amazon media app and navigate around enough, and you'll encounter a page with all their "Third Party Software Licenses."

For instance, here's one for the Amazon Music apps, which includes an FFMpeg license: https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=...

Is the idea that ffmpeg could change its license and wreak havoc?

And? How does that give the ffmpeg authors a power over Amazon? (Hint: it doesn’t and the guy we’re discussing is spewing nonsense for maximum retweets)

As my manager at Amazon once told me, “Amazon prefers H1Bs because they take more abuse.”

Exactly. The difference is doctors were able to cap the number of doctors graduated, and now we have a shortage. Welp, I know the solution to that.

The cost of becoming an MD is astronomical. I have a nephew currently studying for it and he's looking at $500,000 in student loans. For a school in idaho of all places.

Part of the shortage is also because very few people can afford to become doctors.

There are no empty slots for med school in America. We turn qualified kids away.

Except for the DOE student loan programs just capped loans for med school to 200k lifetime so unless students are fairly wealthy, they're going to find it hard to become a doctor.

This article is saying the slowdown started as early as a year ago. That of course opens up the discussion of whether this new revision is political cover for the current administration since they just removed the BLS head.

Amazon's hallucinating a fake 1-800 number for me to call is both peak Amazon and peak AI bubble.

Yes, but when Marc Benioff says he laid off thousands of customer service agents, the reporting is "Salesforce cuts tech workers using AI." The narrative in media is a total mess right now, and there are many in VC and AI-related companies ready to help muddy the waters further for their own benefit. Obviously, many small companies follow the media narrative.

From the subhead

> Money earmarked for semiconductor company under Chips Act could be converted into equity

They’re already getting federal money.

For sure, the Dotcom crash didn’t mean the web was bad technology.

Not technically bad, anyway. Just… socially destructive to the fragile web that held society together.

You’re close. The issue is we can’t discuss class, so they look for all sorts of other analogs which they can get the wealthy folks on board with. DEI is acceptable to the wealthy because they ultimately see less of a threat there than from a person of the same race from the South or Midwest. In the workplace, the female Stanford legacy can still be underprivileged then thanks to gender versus the white male from a poor state with a land grant degree.

both DEI and legacy are going away so it works in your favour.

You missed the first part of that quote:

> At long last everybody realises that the old MPEG business model is now broke

And the entire post is about how dysfunctional MPEG is and how AOM rose to deal with it. It is tragic to waste so much time and money only to produce nothing. He's criticizing the MPEG group and their infighting. He's literally criticizing MPEG's licensing model and the leadership of the companies in MPEG. He's an MPEG member saying MPEG's business model is broken yet no one has a desire to fix it, so it will be beaten by a competitor. Would you not want to see your own organization reform rather than die?

Reminder AOM is a bunch of megacorps with profit motive too, which is why he thinks this ultimately leads to stalled innovation:

> My concerns are at a different level and have to do with the way industry at large will be able to access innovation. AOM will certainly give much needed stability to the video codec market but this will come at the cost of reduced if not entirely halted technical progress. There will simply be no incentive for companies to develop new video compression technologies, at very significant cost because of the sophistication of the field, knowing that their assets will be thankfully – and nothing more – accepted and used by AOM in their video codecs.

> Companies will slash their video compression technology investments, thousands of jobs will go and millions of USD of funding to universities will be cut. A successful “access technology at no cost” model will spread to other fields.

Money is the motivator. Figuring out how to reward investment in pushing the technology forward is his concern. It sounds like he is open to suggestions.

> There will simply be no incentive for companies to develop new video compression technologies, at very significant cost because of the sophistication of the field, knowing that their assets will be thankfully – and nothing more – accepted and used by AOM in their video codecs.

I don't think he fully considered the motivations of Alliance members like Google (YouTube), Meta and Netflix and the lengths they'll go to optimize operational costs of delivering content to improve their bottom line.

Fixing a business model that was always a force that slowed down development, implementation and adoption is not something that should be "fixed". MPEG dying is something to celebrate not whine about.

Could you please point to the whining? He says MPEG is broken, but AOM will stagnate. You’re mad at the messenger.