The Flat Earth Society
Other Discussion Boards => Technology, Science & Alt Science => Topic started by: three-dimensional-world on October 10, 2011, 01:55:12 PM
-
I discovered that, ironically, Libraries are giving a great deal of support to DRM (http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/drm.html).
In ancient history libraries were invented to share knowledge and help people learn. The information is all stored in physical books, so the solution is to borrow/lend them for periods of time.
Today, given widespread usage of the internet, we have "digital libraries" that lend "e-books" (computer files that have all the text of a book stored inside them) as well as audiobooks. What should strike you as very strange is that these are lent out: Digital information isn't physical, so it doesn't have to be lended. Every time you send a file over the internet it is copied: It's not like handing a book to someone because you still have it.
The old paradigms that make sense for physical objects are being mistakenly carried over to digital information. You might think "Well OK whatever it's just a basic mistake, easy to fix right?". In fact the reality of the situation is not that simple, it's not a technical blunder that someone made. Something much more sinister is happening. Let me explain a bit about how you "lend" a digital file first,
Normally when a file is sent from one computer to another it is read using a program. The situation with "lending" "ebooks" is the same: but the file format is intentionally obfuscated and/or encrypted so that it can only be read by a specific program: one created by the government or the library or whoever is lending you this book. This program that lets you read the file is closed off so that you cannot see how it works or what it does. Furthermore, it is programmed to stop cooperating with you (stop letting you read the file, maybe even erasing it completely) after a set time.
Now you see that it's not a simple technical blunder: someone must have worked very hard to design and program such a system intentionally. Why would they do this? The first reason is probably Copyright: In our capitalist society, where everything is exploited for profit. There will be someone restricting the distribution and usage of information. The second reason is that controlling bodies are often happy to procure more control. Forcing widespread use of programs which are closed off and do not cooperate with the user (but perhaps do cooperate with the libraries or other controlling bodies) is an extremely powerful way to get a grip on the masses.
This is a step towards computers as jails. The machines controlling us, rather than helping us. Things like the iPhone and iPad are a big step in this direction, you're not allowed to write new programs for them yourself, let alone share what you've made to help your friends. You can expect less and less technological freedom until we spend our lives caring pandering to the needs of robots if you support DRM.
-
I don't think anyone supports DRM. Most people see it as a necessary evil. I try to avoid DRM where I can.
-
I don't think anyone supports DRM. Most people see it as a necessary evil. I try to avoid DRM where I can.
I estimate that 80% of people regularly using computers don't know what it is and haven't realized/understood the concept. Of the remaining 20% I estimate that 30% do not care or haven't considered it/haven't been told what to think, 50% support it (I include the "necessary evil" cop-out in this category) and 20% are against it. This means I estimate roughly 1 in 400 people (who regularly use computers) are against DRM. The main reason for widespread support today is entertainment like: iPhone/iPad, internet film services (netflix, BBC iPlayer) and video game systems (steam). Soon we will see a rise in "web applications" and the mainstream will stop using desktop programs, this will greatly increase the number of people that are subject to DRM (it is much easier to implement it via web interfaces) and a big increase in the support for it (which is welcomed by capitalists and fascists alike).
I want to increase the "1 in 400" proportion by raising awareness after raising the technical understanding to the point where the reader can actually appreciate the reasons for this technology and it's implications. I estimate that 60% of the relevant population are capable of understanding the issues correctly if the situation is explained in essay from (and since everyone is growing up with computers today this increases quickly).
Unless a serious opposition to DRM is made I make a next-decade prediction of the following: Desktop computers will become more and more crippled in order to better support DRM (we are already witnessing this) as well as allowing police investigators to tap into and monitor you via the internet (a law was recently passed to allow them to do this). Equivalents of "drivers licenses" will be introduced to further segregate types of computer use and discourage regular people from taking advantage of computation restricting them only to be spoon fed restricted types of calculation (e.g. cryptography [which governments are already able to force you to give up your keys for] and cryptocurrencies will be outlawed). It seems likely that "mobile phone" equivalents which contain DRM will be required by schools and jobs to give people access to open doors and such (and "keep" "terrorists/school shooters" ""out"), the flipside is that they will be abused (and we already witness mild forms of this e.g. news of the world "phone hacking" scandal) by organizations to track and exploit people.
-
Not surprising.
Publishing companies don't like the digital technology as it takes away their control.
-
Not surprising.
Publishing companies don't like the digital technology as it takes away their control.
Of course it is, it's causing them to not really "publish" anything, making a traditionally important part of their job irrelevant.
-
Desktop computers will become more and more crippled in order to better support DRM (we are already witnessing this)
Only those of us who choose to live that way are witnessing it. There is a way out, and a very easy one when compared with the way out of many historical oppressive regimes.
-
But Linux is dying. :(
-
But Linux is dying. :(
Irrelevant.
-
Hitler wasn't democratically elected.
Incorrect.
-
Hitler wasn't democratically elected.
Incorrect.
Fuck off. Say what you mean, or don't bother posting.
-
Hitler wasn't democratically elected.
Incorrect.
I'm really getting tired of this shtick. It wasn't funny the first time, and it's not funny the sixth time, either. Stop being a pedantic asshole.
Specifically, I was commenting on the "compared with the way out of many historical oppressive regimes" part of your post. We're currently on our way in to the DRM "regime", which makes the fact that previously regimes have been started democratically is relevant.
-
Hitler wasn't democratically elected.
Incorrect.
I'm really getting tired of this shtick. It wasn't funny the first time, and it's not funny the sixth time, either. Stop being a pedantic asshole.
Specifically, I was commenting on the "compared with the way out of many historical oppressive regimes" part of your post. We're currently on our way in to the DRM "regime", which makes the fact that previously regimes have been started democratically is relevant.
It's not as blatant as "democracy" though, where someone just asks what you want.
In our situation, many people are thinking "I don't want DRM... but I'll just but this ONE iPhone cause it's very very shiny/I just really need this book today and the e-book version is right there/It's so much easier to just but one track off iTunes than go out and get the whole album/...", but that's just the people that are away. Of course most people aren't even aware that they're taking part in a 'vote' when they buy specific types of technology.
-
I don't think it even extends that far. Most people simply don't know, nor care to know.
-
I don't think it even extends that far. Most people simply don't know, nor care to know.
Sounds like a standard political vote to me.
-
Specifically, I was commenting on the "compared with the way out of many historical oppressive regimes" part of your post. We're currently on our way in to the DRM "regime", which makes the fact that previously regimes have been started democratically is relevant.
The difference being that a choice of operating system is not analogous to democracy so much as to anarchy. People don't vote on which operating system to use such that everyone is required to use it; each individual may decide for herself which to use. Thus, there can be no democratically enforced oppression, only self-inflicted.
-
Hitler wasn't democratically elected.
Incorrect.
I'm really getting tired of this shtick. It wasn't funny the first time, and it's not funny the sixth time, either. Stop being a pedantic asshole.
Specifically, I was commenting on the "compared with the way out of many historical oppressive regimes" part of your post. We're currently on our way in to the DRM "regime", which makes the fact that previously regimes have been started democratically is relevant.
It's not as blatant as "democracy" though, where someone just asks what you want.
In our situation, many people are thinking "I don't want DRM... but I'll just but this ONE iPhone cause it's very very shiny/I just really need this book today and the e-book version is right there/It's so much easier to just but one track off iTunes than go out and get the whole album/...", but that's just the people that are away. Of course most people aren't even aware that they're taking part in a 'vote' when they buy specific types of technology.
Thanks for bringing attention to this problem. I am one of the masses that did not know this problem exists.
1. Is spying on people one of the problems of DRM.
2. Are Apple products a big problem?
3.Which products are good to use?
4.How do we help fight against this hideous DRM?
-
1. No. The problem is ownership of data and the ability to copy it as many times to as many computers as possible. It's mostly to prevent music pirating (poorly).
2. Not really. It's the entertainment industry that's the real problem.
3. Ask Steve.
4. Don't use anything that someone is selling and you didn't pay for. Like music.
-
Is TDW jumping to conclusions. This is a step towards computers as jails. The machines controlling us, rather than helping us. Things like the iPhone and iPad are a big step in this direction, you're not allowed to write new programs for them yourself, let alone share what you've made to help your friends. You can expect less and less technological freedom until we spend our lives caring pandering to the needs of robots if you support DRM.
I don't really see the problem.
-
It might exaggerate a bit, but he's basically right.
To most people that aren't tech savvy in the slightest, it doesn't matter. They're happy to give up freedoms they're probably not even aware of.
-
DRM is terrible. The best ways to combat DRM is to do as LordDave says, don't use digital media free, if you're meant to pay for it, and more importantly, if you're going to pay for it, make sure you go out of your way to purchase a copy that isn't laden with DRM.
-
The difference being that a choice of operating system is not analogous to democracy so much as to anarchy. People don't vote on which operating system to use such that everyone is required to use it; each individual may decide for herself which to use. Thus, there can be no democratically enforced oppression, only self-inflicted.
Are we not talking about DRM in media rather than software here?
-
Thanks for bringing attention to this problem. I am one of the masses that did not know this problem exists.
1. Is spying on people one of the problems of DRM.
Not directly, but there are implementations of DRM (such as the AACS system used on Blu-Ray discs) that facilitate spying on users of technology to some degree.
2. Are Apple products a big problem?
Not specifically. There are Apple products that implement DRM, but they are no worse than any other product which implements DRM. The real question to ask is not who created the product, but the terms (both legal and technological) under which you can use it.
3.Which products are good to use?
Unfortunately, it is not easy to enumerate which products are good and which are bad, because there are so many of them out there. Each should be considered on its own merits; by all means, feel free to ask myself or anybody else here about specific products you are considering using, or describe what your needs are and ask for advice.
4.How do we help fight against this hideous DRM?
The only way to rid the world of DRM is to not use products with DRM in them. Here is where I differ from Lorddave and EnigmaZV; I would consider obtaining a pirated copy of a movie to be the only ethical way to obtain it, if it is not available legally in DRM-free form. Breaking the law to obtain a copy that you can use freely is better than allowing the perpetrators of a DRM scheme to legally control your use of the technology you own.
An effective way to fight DRM is to use free software (that is, software that can be freely used, shared and modified) on your personal computer. See my response to PizzaPlanet below for an explanation of why using only free software protects you from DRM. The most popular free software operating system is GNU/Linux, of which the most popular distribution is Ubuntu (http://www.ubuntu.com/) -- while Ubuntu is not 100% free software, it is a reasonable starting point because one of its goals is to be easy to use for those inexperienced with Unix.
The difference being that a choice of operating system is not analogous to democracy so much as to anarchy. People don't vote on which operating system to use such that everyone is required to use it; each individual may decide for herself which to use. Thus, there can be no democratically enforced oppression, only self-inflicted.
Are we not talking about DRM in media rather than software here?
The two are intricately linked. DRM in media requires software that honours that DRM to have any effect at all. This, in turn, requires the software to be non-free, so that its publisher can control what it allows people to do.
It therefore follows that by using only free software, one can escape from DRM entirely.
-
I know this is irrelevant, but why is Ubuntu not as free as Debian?
-
I know this is irrelevant, but why is Ubuntu not as free as Debian?
Ubuntu includes non-free firmware in the kernel (part of the base system), and also provides non-free application software in its package repositories. While Debian also provides an optional package repository containing non-free applications for use with the Debian system, these are clearly documented as not being officially part of Debian. Debian also has a policy against non-free firmware in the kernel.
-
(http://i.imgur.com/vrVVz.jpg)
http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/li4bi/my_opinion_on_all_the_hate_for_origin_and_hype/
-
lol
In addition to BF3, I've also pre-ordered Arkham City on Steam. I have to leap through 3 levels of DRM for AC:
1. SecuROM
2. Windows Live
3. Steam
Looks like I'm part of the problem.
-
lol
In addition to BF3, I've also pre-ordered Arkham City on Steam. I have to leap through 3 levels of DRM for AC:
1. SecuROM
2. Windows Live
3. Steam
Looks like I'm part of the problem.
Don't worry we're all in this sinking ship together. It's already too late!
-
It started to be too late when people figured out they could broadcast games over the radio to be used in your C64 tape drive.
-
(http://i.imgur.com/vrVVz.jpg)
http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/li4bi/my_opinion_on_all_the_hate_for_origin_and_hype/
This is my opinion on the use of non-free software in general.
-
lol
In addition to BF3, I've also pre-ordered Arkham City on Steam. I have to leap through 3 levels of DRM for AC:
1. SecuROM
2. Windows Live
3. Steam
Looks like I'm part of the problem.
I don't think windows live or steam constitute DRM since neither is required to actually play the game.
-
I don't think windows live or steam constitute DRM since neither is required to actually play the game.
They are. You'll have to boot from steam, and sign in to WL. Otherwise you can't play, at all. BF3 is just as bad with Origin.
Should also remember that people have claimed to be boycotting the game based on the Origin requirements. Whether that means anything or not, I don't know. I doubt it.
This is my opinion on the use of non-free software in general.
But you can fly jets, and..
-
The fundamental difference in terms of economics between a physical thing (book, food, whatever) and a piece of digital information (bits, bytes, a text file of a book, a video file of a movie, a game) is that you can copy the digital information infinitely many times at no cost.
So then this DRM technology is introduced so that they can still base their business models on scarcity - if something is rare you can get a lot of money for it. This is done by having a "black box" computer program that only grants you certain types of access to the files/games and also enables the company certain types of privileges (e.g. upgrading or deleting it). [N.B. those old games that required the CD to play aren't considered DRM]
They could build a system that restricted certain actions (like copying the files to another computer or over the internet, or skipping adverts, for example) by technological rather than legal means while still doing everything just as the consumer wants.. but my view is that's not the end of it. There's still something I care about that's being threatened: freedom. If it becomes mandatory of have black boxes on your computer it'll be the end of computers being a tool we use, but instead we'll be at the mercy of computers.
My ideal would be that people distribute freedom-respecting software and put legal restrictions on it (like make it illegal to distribute it over the internet). [analogy warning] DRM to me seems like doing a retina scan on anyone that wants to drive a car, and confirming it with some third party organisation before letting the engine go. My biggest worry is that instead of putting legal restrictions on the files they distribute they start to put legal restrictions on the technology we use. Being able to use your computer freely for things like writing your own programs or running an operating system that you're able to check the source code of could become outlawed.
-
My ideal would be that people distribute freedom-respecting software and put legal restrictions on it
(http://images.steven-mcdonald.id.au/whatthefuckamireading)
-
This is a blog post called The Silencing of Maya http://niederfamily.blogspot.be/2012/06/silencing-of-maya.html (http://niederfamily.blogspot.be/2012/06/silencing-of-maya.html)
The girl can only speak via this certain program on the iPad, but the iPad is full of DRM and the software is non-free.. in particular it relied on a software patent and due to legal issues apple have recalled the program from the store. This is the situation her parents have to deal with:
We are now shadowed by a huge, impending threat. With the removal of Speak for Yourself from the iTunes store, the SfY team has lost the ability to send out updates or repairs to the people who are currently using the app. At this point, an update from Apple to the iPad's operating system (which gets updated semi-regularly) could render SfY useless (because if the new operating system was to be incompatible with the code for SfY, there would be no way for the team to reconfigure the app to make it compatible with the new OS and send out the updated version). Our app could stop working, and Maya would be left unable to speak, and no one would be able to help us.
I recommend reading the rest of the article and keep in mind that this is the reality of non-free software.
-
I recommend reading the rest of the article and keep in mind that this is the reality of non-free software.
This has nothing to do with the software being non-free, and everything to do with software patents. While I agree that a non-free copyright licence could have the same ultimate effect, and it does make the impact of this problem worse in several ways, in this particular case it is not the cause of the problem.
-
Aren't there like a thousand programs that do the same thing?