1. [OT] Re: How do you.....
On Mon, 7 Jul 2003 00:09:38 -0400, jbrown105 at speedymail.org wrote:
>On Tue, Jun 03, 2003 at 11:04:52AM +0200, =
Christian.CUVIER at agriculture.gouv.fr wrote:
><snip>
>> What if this was just a propaganda ploy to panic a lot of people into=
=20
>> buying non-DRM software before the iron curtain falls? It is just too=20
I think it's a little more subtle: the kick comes at hardware upgrade.
>> unlikely that M$ and others move to such a gaping break of=20
>> compatibility, given their record of maintaining ascendant compat with=
=20
>> obsolete techniques and products at a high cost.
>> That's why I don't fret too much about the issue. Just use third =
party=20
>> add-ons to protect your privacy. This is gettong harder since 911, but=
=20
>> remains possible.
>>=20
>> CChris
>>=20
>
>Actually, it might be possible for the DRM OS to allow legacy apps to =
run in an
>'insecure' mode....except for those third-party add-ons, naturally. Same
>for internet connections etc.
Well, yes, non-DRM content. This all relies on taking advantage of the
natural disruption of hardware upgrade to disguise a slow, gradual,
and multi-faceted incursion on our, not just civil, but *economic*
liberties. (11. Thou shalt have no other choice but to pay me)
<snip re linux:>
1) commercial users: just how many are going to leap knowing the big
advantage is their employees can still listen to music, watch videos
and play games when they should be working?
1a) oh and the security thing; I guess they shall all leap since bill
got it wrong eight times already, he MUST be right on the ninth try.
2) and domestic users are going to give up mp3/mpeg/divd?
3) and linux users are going to fold and sneak back to m$?
4) and pacific basin h/w m/f are going to pay BG royalty?
Sure, this is a VERY BAD THING people should be aware of but it will
only affect the bottom feeders
>
>Of course, DRM is just the latest of attempts to use patents to =
monopolize
>computers (and the internet) ... Amazon.com has a patent on the =
single-click
>shopping, and sued a competitor book seller which violated this patent.
I don't blame Amazon for that one, I blame the system which allows
such a ludicrous patent to (continue to) exist.
>
>jbrown
Pete
2. Re: [OT] Re: How do you.....
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 01:22:24AM +0100, Pete Lomax wrote:
<snip>
> >Actually, it might be possible for the DRM OS to allow legacy apps to run in
> >an
> >'insecure' mode....except for those third-party add-ons, naturally. Same
> >for internet connections etc.
> Well, yes, non-DRM content. This all relies on taking advantage of the
> natural disruption of hardware upgrade to disguise a slow, gradual,
> and multi-faceted incursion on our, not just civil, but *economic*
> liberties. (11. Thou shalt have no other choice but to pay me)
>
> <snip re linux:>
> 1) commercial users: just how many are going to leap knowing the big
> advantage is their employees can still listen to music, watch videos
> and play games when they should be working?
> 1a) oh and the security thing; I guess they shall all leap since bill
> got it wrong eight times already, he MUST be right on the ninth try.
> 2) and domestic users are going to give up mp3/mpeg/divd?
> 3) and linux users are going to fold and sneak back to m$?
> 4) and pacific basin h/w m/f are going to pay BG royalty?
>
> Sure, this is a VERY BAD THING people should be aware of but it will
> only affect the bottom feeders
Remember there is a bill that would make this law...i.e. REQUIRED!
If it fails then so will DRM. If it passes then Linux is in danger, but not as
much as our liberties would be.
(I haven't check the status of the bill recently...anyone willing to give us
an update?)
> >
> >Of course, DRM is just the latest of attempts to use patents to monopolize
> >computers (and the internet) ... Amazon.com has a patent on the single-click
> >shopping, and sued a competitor book seller which violated this patent.
> I don't blame Amazon for that one, I blame the system which allows
> such a ludicrous patent to (continue to) exist.
A very good suggestion, was to limit the time on software patents (i.e.
significantly
shorten the time before it expired). Instead of 20 years, Amazon.com would
only get to keep their patent for one or 2 years. Perhaps we should try to push
for that?
> >
> >jbrown
>
> Pete
>
jbrown again.
>
>
> TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE!
>
>
--
/"\ ASCII ribbon | http://www.geocities.com/jbrown1050/
\ / campain against | Linux User:190064
X HTML in e-mail and | Linux Machine:84163
/*\ news, and unneeded MIME | http://verify.stanford.edu/evote.html
3. [OT] Re: How do you.....
On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 05:27:03PM -0400, euman at bellsouth.net wrote:
<snip>
> You don't see this as probable propaganda perpetrated on the masses by
> corporations who
> have a stake in the other OS futures do you Kat?
And yet, who has a bigger stake in XP's future, but M$ itself?
Surely they are as likely to cause such propaganda as anyone else.
>
> Im not saying WinXP is the most secure but everyone knows Linux is more
> insecure.
Prove it.
> ( If over 100,000 script kiddies set out to wreck Linux it wouldn't have taken
> but one. )
>
Of course, many of those 100,000 'script kiddies' are amoung those who help
write Linux (and not just Linux, but also the original Unices as well).
And they also write bugfixes for the OS as well. (BTW Linux is the kernel,
Linux/GNU is the OS [which is the OS named GNU using the kernel named Linux],
and the bare GUI is XFree86.)
>
> Believe half of everything you see and nothing anyone says...
Including M$.
> Euman
>
Not that I'm saying that Windows OSes are a bad thing ... they are one of the
easiest OSes to configure, install, and use. (At least the 9x branch was.)
Windows is a good OS for the computer-illiterate, except the older versions
were too unstable, and the newer versions invade one's privacy too much.
You know, my GUI is set up to be a clone of the Win98 GUI. I run a lot of
programs that look like their Windows counter-parts. Basicly, I try to get
as close to Windows as possible on Linux, because I like the Windows GUI,
and Windows ease of use.
I left Windows merely because I couldn't stand the instability.
And I won't be going back either.
jbrown
--
/"\ ASCII ribbon | http://www.geocities.com/jbrown1050/
\ / campain against | Linux User:190064
X HTML in e-mail and | Linux Machine:84163
/*\ news, and unneeded MIME |
4. [OT] Re: How do you.....
> Having a "3rd party" OS or socks driver simply means your
> packets will be refused from internet routers with a error msg along the
lines
> of "if we can't read it, you can't use our internet."
What is the definition of "we can't read it?" Does that mean if they can't
understand it?
> If an app passes DRM...
What does it mean to pass "DRM?" Does this apply to simple emails?
5. Re: [OT] Re: How do you.....
- Posted by gertie at visionsix.com
Jun 03, 2003
On 3 Jun 2003, at 16:25, C. K. Lester wrote:
>
>
> > Having a "3rd party" OS or socks driver simply means your
> > packets will be refused from internet routers with a error msg along the
> lines
> > of "if we can't read it, you can't use our internet."
>
> What is the definition of "we can't read it?" Does that mean if they can't
> understand it?
I don't know how to explain "read" to you. Hmm,,,, maybe "decypher the bits
so they may be printed out as language tokens, and understood in mental
images like a spoken word"?
> > If an app passes DRM...
>
> What does it mean to pass "DRM?"
"pass DRM" = the OS will permit the application to run, or permit the
application to open a specified file. This means the file is signed with a
unique legally verifiable source signature, and the OS knows it is legal too,
and the file said it's ok for you to open it.
> Does this apply to simple emails?
Of course.
Kat
6. Re: [OT] Re: How do you.....
- Posted by irvm at ellijay.com
Jun 04, 2003
On Tuesday 03 June 2003 10:25 pm, Kat wrote:
> Getting back to the first question, i expect the internet will someday
> refuse to allow non-DRM data to pass, whether a human reads it or not,
> whether it is 1024bit encrypted or not. The server will log it, and and
> automatically checked for use patterns (like spamming, or viewing only porn
> urls). The DRM will be OS-specific, with the owner's unique id, and data
> about the computer glued onto each and every packet. Packet kiddies will
> lose out, abuse will be traceable, or simply not go anywhere. Open proxies
> will disappear. Anonymous web browsing will be history. Sharing exe's will
> be nostalgia. Altering binaries will result in one that won't run on a DRM
> box, even if you could open the binary. And if you want to watch the dvd of
> Matrix4 three times, you'll haveto re-buy it.
Of course. This is all part of Microsoft's two-part plan:
1. To make it nearly impossible for anyone other than Microsoft
( and those who pay homage to Microsoft ) from producing any software,
2. To implement pay-per-use for all software (and perhaps the OS itself).
Naturally, this is just fine with organizations such as the RIAA, who want
you to pay every tiime you hear one of their songs. Or watch a DVD.
And of course it's a very popular plan with politicians, who see a chance
to become very wealthy if they vote the right way, and a golden opportunity
to squelch anyone who uses technology to speak out about their abuses.
I, for one, hope they implement this just as fast as possible.
Because, it it's implemented slowly, people will just get used to being used.
If it happens suddenly enough, then there's likely to be repercussions
from an outraged public. Or, as they say in Texas "git a rope":)
Irv
