Scarey stuff
-
This was out on slashdot as well last week. For myself I'd say: 1) Yawn, who cares if they lock out linux? There are other processor architectures it runs on. I'm really getting a tad bored with someone crying, and the whole linux comunity wringing their hands in collective agony, about the impending doom of linux everytime someone comes out with an article like this. This is almost as bad as the incessant navel gazing, and self-congratulatory back patting that Microsoft goes through every time some MS employee performs a mental fart on their blog and comes up with some goofy new-must-have-half-assed-vaporware technology that we all need to look at. 2) Double Yawn, people have been screaming about the falling sky of DRM doom for almost 5 years now. And we are still no closer to armageddon. Wake me up when there's even *one* remote, real, physical piece of working hardware that I can purchase that behaves this way. To the best of my knowledge none of this has come to fruition outside of some quasi interesting research lab. So remind me, why are we supposed to wet our pants now? Is this being advertised as a new chip that *all* general purpose PC's will be using, so that I will no longer be able to buy *any* kind of PC without having this kind of chip in it? I doubt it. It just occurred to me - I've just used "fart", "technology", "armageddon", and "doom" in a single post. I'll bet I'm now on a terrorist watchlist somewhere... ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
Damn good post! I couldn't agree more!!!! DRM will die the same ignominous way DIVX died.
-
This was out on slashdot as well last week. For myself I'd say: 1) Yawn, who cares if they lock out linux? There are other processor architectures it runs on. I'm really getting a tad bored with someone crying, and the whole linux comunity wringing their hands in collective agony, about the impending doom of linux everytime someone comes out with an article like this. This is almost as bad as the incessant navel gazing, and self-congratulatory back patting that Microsoft goes through every time some MS employee performs a mental fart on their blog and comes up with some goofy new-must-have-half-assed-vaporware technology that we all need to look at. 2) Double Yawn, people have been screaming about the falling sky of DRM doom for almost 5 years now. And we are still no closer to armageddon. Wake me up when there's even *one* remote, real, physical piece of working hardware that I can purchase that behaves this way. To the best of my knowledge none of this has come to fruition outside of some quasi interesting research lab. So remind me, why are we supposed to wet our pants now? Is this being advertised as a new chip that *all* general purpose PC's will be using, so that I will no longer be able to buy *any* kind of PC without having this kind of chip in it? I doubt it. It just occurred to me - I've just used "fart", "technology", "armageddon", and "doom" in a single post. I'll bet I'm now on a terrorist watchlist somewhere... ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
Well actually isn't it the new Intel processors they are talking about? Wouldn't that count as Is this being advertised as a new chip that *all* general purpose PC's will be using, so that I will no longer be able to buy *any* kind of PC without having this kind of chip in it? As for I'm really getting a tad bored with someone crying, and the whole linux comunity wringing their hands in collective agony, about the impending doom of linux everytime someone comes out with an article like this. I think it is more that digital media content will be locked up and the definition of "fair use" will be changed to "pay per play". Now if all that sounds OK to you then I agree there is nothing to worry about. If (on the other hand) you are bothered by the increasing corporate takeover of the law making process in the US and their attempts at trying to spread their reach globally then I think it is troubling.
-
Well actually isn't it the new Intel processors they are talking about? Wouldn't that count as Is this being advertised as a new chip that *all* general purpose PC's will be using, so that I will no longer be able to buy *any* kind of PC without having this kind of chip in it? As for I'm really getting a tad bored with someone crying, and the whole linux comunity wringing their hands in collective agony, about the impending doom of linux everytime someone comes out with an article like this. I think it is more that digital media content will be locked up and the definition of "fair use" will be changed to "pay per play". Now if all that sounds OK to you then I agree there is nothing to worry about. If (on the other hand) you are bothered by the increasing corporate takeover of the law making process in the US and their attempts at trying to spread their reach globally then I think it is troubling.
fakefur wrote: I think it is more that digital media content will be locked up and the definition of "fair use" will be changed to "pay per play". Well you should probably qualify that with content by the big names like Disney, Sony, etc. I say fine, let them commit this idiocy, and the market will sort it out it pretty quickly. Now if someone passes a law that requires *all* digital content, of any sort, *must* use some sort of DRM, then that's a whole nother ball of wax. I'm pretty sure that would be a free speech issue. fakefur wrote: If (on the other hand) you are bothered by the increasing corporate takeover of the law making process in the US and their attempts at trying to spread their reach globally then I think it is troubling. I am extremely bothered by this. I just have a hard time getting worked up over this specific issue. Especially when I think the issue is overhyped, overwrought, semi-hysterical hand waving over something that will most likely be corrected in market when it's launched. ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
-
Damn good post! I couldn't agree more!!!! DRM will die the same ignominous way DIVX died.
ahz wrote: DRM will die the same ignominous way DIVX died. When did Divx die? I see dead pixels Yes, even I am blogging now!
-
ahz wrote: DRM will die the same ignominous way DIVX died. When did Divx die? I see dead pixels Yes, even I am blogging now!
Behind death of Divx were angry customers[^] Published: June 17, 1999, 6:40 AM PDT "In a nutshell, Divx is--or was--a pay-per-view variation of DVD introduced late last year by Circuit City. Today, Divx ceased operations, partly because of a lack of competitively priced players, partly because of a dearth of hot Divx movie titles, and mainly because of a consumer backlash which can only be compared to the reaction to New Coke. " Ding-Dong, Divx Is Dead[^] 01:15 PM Jun. 16, 1999 PT "For many, the death of Divx comes as little surprise. The DVD crowd has long regarded the product -- as well as the people behind it -- with suspicion and resentment." "But it was the product's potential for invasion of privacy that particularly infuriated DVD partisans." "Divx devices play back movies much as DVD players and VCRs do. But the creators designed the system so that the viewers would have to pay for each viewing of a movie." Sounds a lot like DRM doesn't it???
-
Behind death of Divx were angry customers[^] Published: June 17, 1999, 6:40 AM PDT "In a nutshell, Divx is--or was--a pay-per-view variation of DVD introduced late last year by Circuit City. Today, Divx ceased operations, partly because of a lack of competitively priced players, partly because of a dearth of hot Divx movie titles, and mainly because of a consumer backlash which can only be compared to the reaction to New Coke. " Ding-Dong, Divx Is Dead[^] 01:15 PM Jun. 16, 1999 PT "For many, the death of Divx comes as little surprise. The DVD crowd has long regarded the product -- as well as the people behind it -- with suspicion and resentment." "But it was the product's potential for invasion of privacy that particularly infuriated DVD partisans." "Divx devices play back movies much as DVD players and VCRs do. But the creators designed the system so that the viewers would have to pay for each viewing of a movie." Sounds a lot like DRM doesn't it???
Thanks for the link. I asked that because a few days I ago I saw a Philips ad bragging about DivX support, but that's probably because of the market of "alternative" videos... I see dead pixels Yes, even I am blogging now!
-
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24638[^] Seriously. This is bad no? :~
The open source community is divided into two groups those who think and those who pretend. Those who pretend will cry out about all the unfair treatment and this and that and all the other anti-ms crap they can vomit up. However, the open source thinkers will have one reaction. They will take a big slug from their slurpees wipe their nose with their tatoo covered arms, wiggle their birkenstock clad toes and collectively chuckle under their own private banner that goes something like this, "Hey boys. Check this out. We've got some new code to crack." and they will kick back on their PII-400's and they will disassemble the architecture they will reverse engineer the concept and eventually crack the code and most likely before it gets released. Quite simply the open source community could really and truly give a rats butt about what companies do to try and hurt Linux. The real thinkers in open source are not intimidated by much of anything. They'll be just fine and you know what? That's bad news for the commercial companies. Why? Because the open source community just rolls on. Each new effort to quash the open source engine fails and so each subsequent reaction gets more extreme. The net result is equilibrium. There's a natural balance in all of this. Microsoft and Intel and Disney and everyone has a right to their buck. Even though they have lots of bucks they have a right to it. The open source community has never cared about the buck (and that's plain to see). The open source community has tried to give a working PC to anyone and everyone. So some consumers will flock to the anti-piracy hardware and software in ignorance. Others will grudgingly accept it and many, many more will go, "That's a crock!" It's a double-edged sword though because invariably it draws more people to open source. But open source is even screwed up in to many ways. Licensing, support, bug-fixes, documentation are so bad that the silver bullet open source could be never will be. Like I said, all this stuff will balance out just fine. You'll have your iPod, your Linux mail server and your Windows desktop and all will be cool. Life always seems to find it's own natural balance eh? If you want to see the funnies thing though and it would certainly be a repost here. Google for "spiffy in a tux" then join the growing mass of Linux super villains and fembots with a penchant for evil. In the end it's all just a bunch of spun-up hype. Balance dude it's all going to balance. - Rex
-
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24638[^] Seriously. This is bad no? :~
If I understand right, this isn't just for Microsoft. This is the platform Apple will be using for the x86 Mac. Anyway, the whole article is a bunch of whining by freeloaders who don't want to pay for anything. In the midst of all their hysterical rantings, they suggest that the only way to watch a digital movie will be through this platform. Huh? What stupid boat did these people fall off of? Beyond the stupidity of that paranoia, does anyone really believe that this new DRM scheme won't be cracked in weeks, if not days? Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
fakefur wrote: I think it is more that digital media content will be locked up and the definition of "fair use" will be changed to "pay per play". Well you should probably qualify that with content by the big names like Disney, Sony, etc. I say fine, let them commit this idiocy, and the market will sort it out it pretty quickly. Now if someone passes a law that requires *all* digital content, of any sort, *must* use some sort of DRM, then that's a whole nother ball of wax. I'm pretty sure that would be a free speech issue. fakefur wrote: If (on the other hand) you are bothered by the increasing corporate takeover of the law making process in the US and their attempts at trying to spread their reach globally then I think it is troubling. I am extremely bothered by this. I just have a hard time getting worked up over this specific issue. Especially when I think the issue is overhyped, overwrought, semi-hysterical hand waving over something that will most likely be corrected in market when it's launched. ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
I do agree that it will *probably* be sorted out by market forces BUT typical consumers don't know about this stuff and probably won't care until it becomes too late. With both MS and Intel being and having been sued left right and centre for monopolistic practices I do find it very very troubling that they *might* be about to try to tie up online digital content like this. Don't forget that with Apple opting for Intel now too they can get their content wrapped up this way too. A simple upgrade to iPod's and the DRM can be enforced to all market segments that matter to Hollywood. And that would be game over. Welcome to pay per play. That's why it bothers me.
-
I do agree that it will *probably* be sorted out by market forces BUT typical consumers don't know about this stuff and probably won't care until it becomes too late. With both MS and Intel being and having been sued left right and centre for monopolistic practices I do find it very very troubling that they *might* be about to try to tie up online digital content like this. Don't forget that with Apple opting for Intel now too they can get their content wrapped up this way too. A simple upgrade to iPod's and the DRM can be enforced to all market segments that matter to Hollywood. And that would be game over. Welcome to pay per play. That's why it bothers me.
fakefur wrote: Welcome to pay per play. Only if the customer *buys* it. If no one buys the content, some other enterprising company will step in. It may take a year or three for it to correct itself, depending on how braindead the "big guys" are about this, but it will happen. I do not think people will be horribly keen about *never* being able to own the hard copy content, like you can when you buy a physical DVD or CD (or whatever). Like the other guy mentioned with Divx, this will sort itself out pretty quickly, *unless* the media companies set up some sort of limits by changing the law as well as changing the hardware. That would get ugly, but like I said before, I suspect that would entail some sort of violation of free speech, and that would ultimately get turned over. Or who knows, maybe I'm just being hopelessly naive, and these bastards will just end up steamrolling us all :) ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!