Slashdot Mirror
Palladium, 'Trusted PCs' in the News
Reuters is carrying a fairly lengthy article on Palladium and 'Trusted Computing'. Worth reading - remember that what the Reuters/AP wires carry is all that most people will ever know about any particular issue.
If by lengthy you mean more than one page.. let me get this straight, now the slashdot editors are not only too lazy to check for reposts, they're too lazy to read a couple pages? I bet I could dig up a better qualifier for a Microsoft-laden article than "somewhat lengthy".
How does replacing silicon with palladium transform open hardware into trusted hardware?
I'd say that its a pretty good article. I'm not an extremely savvy computer user, especially compared to the typical /. reader. I do know more than my parents and wife, undoubtedly, and think that the article is a fine synopsis of the two sides. It also seemed to give a bit more column space to the critics and talked more about control of your computer and restriction of fair use than the 'advantages' of virus control. It would have been nice to see a link to the Palladium FAQ and perhaps a comment from a critic pointing out that Microsoft's inherent software inadequacies are the root of the problem.
All in all a good article for the masses. Just needs more followup for those interested.
Etc, etc, ad nauseam, and so on and so forth.
mod parent up :D that was pretty funny
"Microsoft wants the Chinese to pay for software,"
Makes you wonder if the Chinese didn't see all this brewing and decided to get a head start early on the Linux push.
The article is much more critical than I would have imagined. I've always seen Reuters as being in the pockets of big corporations like Microsoft, but there seems to be more criticism than praise.
Maybe there's hope for Palladium being struck down after all?
The future isn't what it used to be.
Preventing data from being tampered with is just another form of stuffing large sausages into a linux user's anus... Sure, he likes it, but is it really good for him?
The article says "Microsoft, Intel, and 200 other companies...". I sure hope that AMD is not going along with this troubled consortium. If Intel decides to build all of its processors in some fashion that lets the peecee makers control whatever we do with our machines, then we need other makers like AMD to build the alternative machines that play the way the owner of the machine wants it to.
Apple, as well, was not specifically mentioned as a player. With their track record, it is doubtful that they would be involved with these scoundrels.
"Send an Instant Karma to me" - Yes
Since when was a two page research paper fairly lengthy? Most English Comp 101 classes require 2+ pages on the first assignment...
I'm not sure if this is a sign of the sad state of popular media, or the sad state of all populus.
I live in a giant bucket.
Microsoft be free from viruses and worms? To the average reader of this article, the response is....there's a snowball's chance in hell of that happening. So there must be something else behind it (DRM......etc.), even when they deny that there's any tracking methodology built-in.
FWIW, the article screwed up on the PIII serial number. The more I think about that one, the less I care. Your proc has a unique ID that someone can retrieve over the 'net? Yah, in most cases, so does your NIC.
Palladium involves new security components to be built into Windows, but it also depends heavily on hardware makers--including Intel and AMD--building in Palladium functionality to their products.
And a nice big ad for MS Visual Studio in the story too, how ironic.
As proof, Anderson points to a patent called "Digital Rights Management Operating System," for which Microsoft has rights
One of the first times a software patent might actually be a good thing. At least stifling competition and innovation in this area will give us a chance to focus our efforts on what is inevitably going to be a fundamentally flawed MS implementation of DRM.
Biddle and a TCPA spokesman deny the assertions, saying that no monitoring, reporting or censoring capabilities are designed into the systems, and people will be able to choose whether they want to use the security features, or not.
Talk about bullshit. DRM is useless if the user can turn it off.
To some, the TCPA plan is reminiscent of Intel's proposal in the mid-1990s to put a serial number on its Pentium chips. Public backlash caused Intel to abandon the plan.
Last I checked, the serial numbers are still there, and even though you can turn them off in the CMOS on some motherboards, software can turn them back on, so I hear.
By contrast, in trusted computing, special security chips and other hardware will work with software to verify the source of data and that it has not been changed, and to create safe zones within the computer for storing information.
Talk about a stupid solution to a simple problem. It doesn't require special hardware to protect the integrity of files, just proper software design. The earlier story on microBSD showed an implementation of software based integrity verification.
Technology companies must carefully balance individual rights and corporate interests, says Bruce Schneier, cryptography expert and chief technology officer at Counterpane Internet Security, a network monitoring firm.
Consumers used to vote with their dollars, no "balancing" was necessary. MS is betting on using monopoly power, and ignorant consumers to pull this one over on the public. Educated consumers are a necessary part of the free market, with technology becoming so complex, and specialization at an all time high, this may point to a larger problem, a complete breakdown of the free market, due to the lack of educated consumers.
"Microsoft wants the Chinese to pay for software," said Ross Anderson, head of computer security at the University of Cambridge in England and a renowned software expert.
Yeah, cause we all know those fucking chinks just leech off westerners. That is a pretty controversial thing to tell an AP reporter. To be fair, it was probably taken out of context.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
I must have been entirely too used to reading articles on CNN, Salon, etc. which look entirely too much like press releases for Microsoft, stating only how whatever new toy will Save Families And Protect The Children, and not how it will impede freedom.
By contrast, this article mentions the negatives in, heck, pretty much every paragraph. It notes that Microsoft denies any freedom-limiting intent, but it also makes it very clear that a lot of people are really worried; the potential to limit freedom is certainly there.
I suppose it's too much for me to expect for one silly Reuters article to change the world, but it certainly gives me some hope.
"If we're going to get content on the 'Net, somehow we're going to have to reward the people who put it on there,"
What?? i cant even begin to start arguing with that statement at this time in the morning, theres just too much to type. ok (insert massive flame to the RIAA, MPAA etc. here, include mention of lame teeny-pop, bad movies, and the whole host of good things on the internet, like the osdn for one..)
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
could be either the salvation of electronic commerce or the bane of consumers, who view the Internet as their digital information playground.
*emphasis mine
I think the implicit meaning here is that consumers think the internet is theirs. when in fact it is not.
What will happen when corporate america convinces the world that it owns the internet?
Aaaah, yes. We are quite familiar w/ "optional add-on features" found in Microsoft's operating systems.
And to most people, it makes total sense then to ban those anonymous, crime-friendly pc's. I suppose the silver lining is, we could at least free ourselves of spammers. So it's a tough call ;-)
with "Our products just aren't engineered for security"..
we need the help of hardware developers to produce a secure OS. Intel is good because they are helping. IBM is bad because they aren't helping. Linux is bad because they don't support secure hardware. Apple is bad because they are not locked into our platform. blah blah.
I'll use enterprise level hardware running linux as a desktop before I ever run paladium commodity hardware.
Or I will stick to my current desktop running linux untill Microsoft is brought to HEEL.
If voting were effective, it would be illegal by now.
Maybe it's just me, but a news story (even an even-handed one like this) on Palladium and how it will try to secure PCs just a day or two after a story in which Microsoft leaders admit that their current systems are not 'designed for security' seems mighty suspicious....
Cogito ergo sum in Slashdot.
Platform Alliance (TCPA) would, if implemented, fundamentally shift
... Later, he says, he realized the same technology could be used to protect consumer data from theft or tampering.
the balance of power between individual and corporate ownership of
Congress.
And I thought to myself - is it really that bad?
Of course, the missing line says it all:
data -- a debate that is already being played out in U.S. courts and
And that goes too far! Do what you want with my democratic instutions - HANDS OFF MY WAREZ!
began in 1997 trying to address the problem of how to protect copyrighted content
Now that's a shocker!
Obviously controlling the user was the first goal of their plan, and, uh, it stops viruses was the second. Up to this point, though, they (MS) has been pretty uniform in claiming that protecting the user was their first concern. I'm very surprised to hear them come out and admit this.
I keep forgetting: expect the unexpectedly stupid.
The good and new comes from no quarter where it is looked for, and is always something different from what is expected.
Is that such a bad thing? You wouldn't see a story that well balanced on TV. TV news offers nothing except one sided stories. Then of course you have specialty news sites like Slashdot or The Register. Can you tell me with a straight face that The Register offers fairly balanced articles?
Reuters, the Associated Press, and local newspaper staff writers are the last bastion of fair reporting. You have to admit that this article was very fairly written. It offered no opinions of it's own, and reported both sides of the argument without trying to say which one was "right". If Joe Sixpack were to read this, he would be free to make his own opinion based on the facts, not have one shoved down his throat. I think we should be thankful that fair reporting still exists in this corporation dominated society.
the problem with a hardware solution is its harder to fix when millions of people have bought it and dont want to fork over more money for an upgrade. and with micro$oft'$ track record...
In 1998 during an interview with Money Magazine, Bill Gates said, "Althought three million computers are sold in China each year, people don't pay for their software. They will soon though. They will get sort of adicted to it and we will have to find a way to collect in the next decade."
Needless to say, this is extremely offensive to the Chinese for historical reasons (think Opium War). Lol, between Gates and "Our products just aren't engineered for security" Valentine, I wonder how Microsoft stays in business...
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
the question about "trusted computing" is exactly who are they trusting? it certainly isn't the end user, who basically is told to BOHICA (bend over, here it comes again)
Guns are like umbrellas and condoms. Better to have one and not need it, than need it and not have one.
Digital Rights Management. They've managed (har har) to take them all away. A few months ago, someone on some forum somewhere said all concerns over Palladium were/are just alarmist paranoia; Someone said the the plan was beneficial to consumers, etc. A couple years before that, people said the existence of anything like Palladium at all was alarmist theory and claptrap. The same thing was said about national I.D. cards and barcodes before that and Social Security numbers before that... What will be alarmist bullshit according to the "Sane and Logical" next year?
Kickin' it self-righteous school.
Ugh, Dave, the majority of people who put content on the 'Net are getting their reward: they're sharing their thougths, dreams, ideas, projects, photos, songs, etc. with the world. And the vast majority of them, virally enough, aren't charging for it. Go figure.
Of course, Palladium has absolutely nothing to do with DRM. Microsoft just patented it by accident. And if DRM happens to be built in to your OS, well it's just 'unfortunate'.
No 14 year old through college age kid in his right mind would ask Mommy and Daddy to buy them the DRM-PC.
"I bet I could dig up a better qualifier for a Microsoft-laden article than "somewhat lengthy"."
But if you submitted it I'll bet it would _NEVER_ get posted.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
Some experiences require an Internet connection for full functionality.
And some experiences require Microsoft to fuck you up the ass. So what ?
I give my time to 5-7 different projects at once, most of which have my name on the about dialog or -v switch.
What do I get in exchange? I get hundreds of thousands of programs as part of my Linux distrobution on my server.
Is it a good arrangement? I think so.
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
When Microsoft came to talk to us about Palladium, Seth took some notes and did this write up.
-- Are you an EFF member yet?
Dream on...the spammers will have a field day with this steaming pile of s**t.
Hmm, I take that back
So, what about the screwdriver-shack white box PCs? Is Intel going to make CPUs only for the new "trusted" computers? If so then will we have only HP and crew to make our hardware? Please tell me VIA isn't on the list. If they are not, then all is ok, we'll still have the DIY computers. I'd take a slow CPU Cyrix/Via made over one that sends my keystrokes to the feds "just in case". And even worse, what if some cool-arse-must-have-new-game comes out that only runs on this new crap from MS. May the flees of a thousand camels come to nest in the genitalia of the people responsible for that mess.
Then again, I'm known for my xfiles style paranoia.
And lest we forget, copyright is what makes things like the GPL possible. If there was no copyright, Microsoft could hijack all of linux, close it up, and that source would never again see the light of day.
Of course the question that has to be asked is what will be modified in a closed Chinese version of Linux that would be worth having in the main distribution? How many of those useful improvements will be leaked to the outside world through other channels?
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
The only serious threat is legislation or legal precedent: if running your favorite OS on an embedded chip becomes defined as "circumvention" under the DMCA, then there is real trouble. But then we'd be heading for the technological dark ages anyway: a DRM world simply cannot support a rapid pace of technological innovation.
It's a bit bland, but that's about all you can expect form mainstream. I just loved this paragraph, though:
"While Palladium is still a long way off, an uproar has arisen over how technologies might be used to curtail consumer "fair use" rights to make personal copies of movies and music and to more tightly control software use."
Why on earth did they put the term "fair use" in quotes? It sounds almost like they're trying to discredit the notion.
Other than this one glaring exception, not a bad piece. Not a good piece, but not bad either.
BlackGriffen
Excuse me, but this "Chinese" that Bill wants to pay for his stuff, does that include the Taiwanese who manufacture half the hardware used to run his stuff?
And what happens when America locks down its computers? Does Taiwan sit back and say, "Yeah, okay" - or do they start building boxes without the Palladium hardware and maybe even their own CPUs and start selling them worldwide (and smuggling them into America will be the next big "Drug War" issue!) and take over the computer industry from Intel? While Linux is taking over the software market from Windows by ignoring the issue?
Go ahead, Bill! Feel free! Don't let the door hit your butt on the way to the poor house!
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
IMHO, Microsoft is going to lose with Palladium big time. Consumers, even non-tech savy consumers, don't like crippled products. As soon as Joe User installs a new version of Media Player or what have you, and finds out he can't play his mp3 collection, that software is outta there. Bells and whistles notwithstanding.
"A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
Ack!
"If we're going to get content on the 'Net, somehow we're going to have to reward the people who put it on there"
Interesting, I thought that the CIC handled that...
Karma: Non-Heinous
Comment removed based on user account deletion
~~~
...if you were to create an virtual machine\emulator of this OS\Media Player\Abomination that ignored or altered the functioning of the DRM hardware\software suite?(Other than a blatant violation of the DMCA, that is...) There is no system that can't be cracked, especially where MS is concerned. Suits will never out-geek the geeks.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
please do not use my son's name in vain, or i will be forced to smite you down, punk.
If entertainment is the killer application, and DRM is going to be the critical enabling technology, then the PC has to do DRM or risk being displaced in the home market.
You know what I say? LET IT. Let's face the facts:
PC sales have leveled off. The market is at saturation. There is no "killer app" that will make anyone who does not presently own a PC go out and get one. If they don't own a PC by now, they DON'T want one and nothing will change that. The majority of PC sales are now replacements for existing obsolete/older machines and machines for new population members. It's the same situation the car manufacturers face, and they're used to it. The IT companies are just freaked because it's no longer a growth market and they're having to adjust.
Interactive TV, network appliances, video phones and flying cars. All ideas that sound good and futuristc, all without mainstream acceptance. It is quite possible "The PC as an entertainment appliance" is just as doomed to becoming a niche market as any other anticipated "killer app" that awaits over the horizon.
Tivos aren't exactly flying off the shelves. Yes the Tivo is a neat geek toy. The public at large doesn't care. They already own a VCR.
I don't want to wait for a movie to download that I can only watch on one PC. I want the DVD that I can play in my DVD player, my friend's DVD player or bring it with me and watch it on the TV in my boat.
I don't want to wait for an entire album to download that I can only listen to on one PC. Just like DVDs, I want the actual disc.
There is a place I can already get what I want, and it's nearby where I shop for food and they also sell clothes - it's very convienent, it's called the local department store. If the digital intellectual property the media companies are so interested in protecting was only less expensive, they wouldn't have to worry about protecting it. I'd much rather buy it.
Hopefully this stupid survey conducted by Ipsos-Reid will not cast doubt on the importance I see of a strong and supportive partnership with our brothers to the south.
...
Quoting, Seven in ten (69%) Canadians think that the United States, because of its policies and actions in the Middle East and other parts of the world, bear some of the responsibility for the terrorist attacks on them, while 15% indicate that they believe that the U.S. bears all of the responsibility.
The question is overly broad and thus meaningless, additionally the timing is both inconsidered and just a cheap way of creating news by bashing Americans. Supporting a soverign nation (Israel) in its struggle for acceptance and a right to exist, and deploying military forces in Saudi Arabia when asked, does not constitute a justification for the cowardly act of September 11th.
For more information, here is an article, but more importantly, I think we should all Ipsos-Reid what we think of their "make news bullshit by bashing Americans" at
John Wright
Senior Vice-President
Ipsos-Reid Public Affairs
(416) 324-2900
To my American brothers, I am sorry for this type of survey, see to it that Ipsos-Reid doesn't do it again... Take the time, even if it is just a two-word email!
Tournament Management Online &
How many people are actively boycotting the MPAA/RIAA because of this shit?
Taken a step further, how many people actually feel good starting up the ol' P2P client and ripping the media companies a new one?
I'm not advocating piracy, what I'm merely pointing out is that maybe the increase in piracy is due to the fact that all this digital rights stuff is making people feel a little bit better about not paying for music and movies. Instead of decreasing piracy, all they (the media companies) might really cause is MORE rampant piracy and the rise of prices of "open" hardware on eBay.
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
Before reading this article, I knew little about Palladium. Since reading this article, I know little about Palladium. It was a whole lot of nothing. Like .Net, I still don't know what Palladium is, and suspect that I won't want any part of it when I do. It is probably part of the dark conspiracy to spy on us, and bring about the New World Order with things like webcams, bugged ceiling fans,
the V-chip, and mind control software.
The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
You open the iPod box and the first words you see are: " Don't Steal Music "
Cake or Death? Cake Please!
a b c d e f g h i ?!
Now the question is if RICO statutes could be applied. Then every one involved with the damn thing could lose big bucks. Really big bucks.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
American bashing AC!
Mod your own ass down!
It's already begun! http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item =2051153825
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
"If we're going to get content on the 'Net, somehow we're going to have to reward the people who put it on there," said Dave Farber
Yeah, this is such a problem. I mean, right now, the Internet contains more content than me or even a large group of people could possibly hope to consume in a lifetime. And don't even start to say that most of the content now is garbage. That's (one) very much a matter of personal taste and (two) ignoring the fact that an essentially infinite amount of good information plus an essentially infinite amount of garbage still supplies you with plenty of good content...and search engines help us tune out the garbage.
media companies complained they wouldn't release high-quality versions of their published content to personal computers because of piracy concerns
Books and movies are available from libraries. I'm sure they hate that too. But I think the reason they complain about the Internet so much is it's an unbelievably large library without even so much as a librarian to regulate the usage of anything. Corporations want to start commercializing the information content of the Internet, instead of settling for selling physical products online. They are blinded by the opinion that if there is a way they can make money, then they have a right to make money that way. Thus they feel we must start to regulate all the information on the Internet. Bastards.
"I like to call this controlled computing rather than trusted computing," said Chris Hoofnagle
I like to call this crippled computing rather than controlled computing.
What may be perceived as minor intrusions in a Western corporate setting might have Big Brother consequences for computer users in countries with more controlled environments like China and Saudi Arabia.
Huh? WTF does this mean? That we can trust the Western corporations not to abuse power? That Western citizens are apathetic to the notion of a Big Brother? Any way that I read this it makes no sense.
"[DRM is] not something that really is part and parcel of what Palladium is," Biddle says, adding that it is related to optional add-on features that customers could elect to use.
This is tantamount to saying here is our new computer product, which you can use with this set of optional handcuffs. Go ahead, try them on, you'll like them. What? You don't want to use them? Hmm. Okay guys, bring in the service pack! Now it's mandatory.
"Security is more social than technical," Schneier said. "There are a lot of good technical controls in Palladium, but it's unclear whether they'll be used to protect personal privacy or limit personal freedom.
Finally someone with a clue. I might add that convincing the general public that the Internet lacks content, that they need Palladium, that they should use the "optional" features -- is all social engineering. There is no technical justification for any of it, but since the gap between someone who understands the true potential of a computer and someone who just uses email is so huge, it may not be that difficult for them to convince Joe User that his computer should be "secured" for his own protection. If people are ignorant of what they're losing, they won't cry foul when they lose it.
*Sigh* Back to searching for the scarce crumbs of useful content on the Internet...
You've made a good point.
Any (IMO) "trusted" security system can be broken, given sufficient resources and access to the hardware. Palladium looks like it'd take the resources of a major nation to crack.
Umm... China is a major nation, y'know.
Most people don't like to read serious newspapers... they don't have enough pie charts and they use big, headache-inducing words like "president" and "Gorbachev." So a lot of people read USA Today or tabloids which use catchy, easy-to-swallow words like "prez" and "Gorby." Those papers dumb the news down and cut out critical information their readers don't want to think about anyway.
A far larger portion of the population gets its news from television, which is not news at all. It's entertainment, soundbites, hype, ads and then one to four sentences about the news. Even the most well-intentioned copy writer cannot encapsulate "Trusted Computing" fairly in four spoken sentences, so everyone who watches the broadcast will be very poorly informed.
Then there's the largest group: the people whose news consists of the watered-down, telephone-game-tainted rumors they hear from the people they know. They don't watch/read the news because they don't want to.
Reuters is often trash compared to the AP or a good newspaper reporter's story, but it's far better than what most people will hear about this issue.
What if MS starts selling PC's at a price that makes them the cheapst bang for the buck but they only run their OS's and there is a small monthy fee but that includes net access and the hardware and after X years, they agree to send you a new box. Work just purchased a new PC to test compatability and the most expensive single componet was a MS license. A MS OS and Office would have cost more than the computer and thats what 99% of the businesses think they need.
What will happen to your local scredriver shop if MS decides to sell PC's at $200 plus $39/mo through the local walmart and they just happen to have the newest Intel offering which no one else seems to have in stock? The Xbox is the 2nd MS offering that fits in the model (web Tv was the 1st).
Hmmm...
Have you been to China? Or any asian country besides perhaps Japan? Do you see them "buying" software? Somehow I doubt it. Even here in Japan there are always about a dozen Chinese or Korean and Japanese people selling warez shit on the street in Akihabara.
When they start writing their own software, I can't wait for them to try and sell it. Or maybe it will become, only steal foreigner software. But I doubt it. If you've ever been to China I think you will quickly notice that MONEY is more popular than Confucious. When they start getting to the level where they want to sell their software... watch out world.
So, basically I've wasted my college education, because greedy bastards are going to screw up everything we know and love about the internet and our techological ways of life...
I'm serious, talk to your less-geeky friends and family. This is not a rant. Spread the word in plain english, then the common folk know they don't need to upgrade to an operating system that will simply restrict what they do.
Because after all the work put into the desktop systems, not even one of them comes close to matching OSX. It's just a gui based on BSD. What the fuck is up guys? Why the hell can't linux people make a decent user-friendly OS? We don't even have good font support for fucks sake.
I use linux, but it is fucking pathetic that we can't even get good fonts. Linux is laughable.
Maintaining that these systems are needed to impede hackers, proponents say they could help restore law and order in a world where digital piracy is rampant.
The classic piracy FUD. Last time I looked, all the big media groups were still making money. But, as we all know, unlike brick and mortar retailers, they can't just accept that there is a nominal loss due to shoplifting and or employee theft. Nah, they need to have it all or society as we know it will collapse.
"If we're going to get content on the 'Net, somehow we're going to have to reward the people who put it on there," said Dave Farber, an Internet engineering pioneer and computer science professor at the University of Pennsylvania who is an independent consultant to the TCPA.
Before I even start to rant about the content that is already on the internet, who is this Dave Farber guy that is some sort of "Internet engineering pioneer?" I mean I thought Al Gore invented the internet anyway, did this guy help?
"Security is more social than technical," Schneier said. "There are a lot of good technical controls in Palladium, but it's unclear whether they'll be used to protect personal privacy or limit personal freedom.
Translated from corporate speak: The control mechanisms we propose will be very profitable if we can get the masses to swallow them. However, it is as yet unclear if they will accept a pill as big as this one.
Really, I know what I'm doing...Ohhhh, look at the shiny buttons!
We all know it's Al Gore's Internet
No sig for you!!
Microsoft has had a tradition at convincing its customers into buying its products with the ease of use as their selling point.Building a GUI application with Visual Studio or .NET version has been easier than building one in java using say IBM's Visual Age for java. Every release of its OS/Office touted as a tool for a better "user experience". They have been quite successful at using the initial fear of users to migrate to a different platform against open source solutions.
Palladium, for once, cannot be sold under a "ease of use" label with all the restrictions that will be added.
When many a online business models based on paid service having failed primarily because of user reluctance in not wanting to pay for anything once available for free, how easy is it going to be for microsoft to sell its OS that would almost eliminate free content ?
Siggy Say, Siggy Do
With all thios effort to constrain creativity and innovation, there needs to be effort and work being done to create laws (plenty of licenses are already available) that protect our right to be creative and innovative with what is the most versatile tool we have yet created, the computer.
The constraints being proposed in DRM and such are a contridiction of such creativity and innovation freedom, not to mention the taking away of far use. But if these constraints are chosen to be applied by such a collective, then as product producers they have every right.
HOWEVER, They DO NOT Have the Right to Suppress Competition for Comsumer Choice. It is wrong to try and shut out open systems which contribute to creativity and innovation, not to mention far use.
I should have a choice, not be forced to buy one or the other but have a choice as to whether I am buying a genuine computer or some constrained to the level of dedicated applicance, device.
These are two different items!!! And it should be made clear, made very clear.
On one hand you have appliances and that which will only run on such appliances. On the other hand, the choice of versatility open for being creative and innovative with, limited only by not being able to access products designed specifically for the constrained appliances.
TWO different general Lines of Products.
One Constrained, the other NOT.
Those pursuing constraints need the hell to stop infringing upon genuine computers system which were here before they came up with a lessor systems. They need to make it clear to the buying public that they are not taking away consumer choice, but making a different product.
The Consumer has a right to have choice!!
Why has this difference not been identified and made clear to the general public?
It seems very clear to me that there is a great deal of consumer deception going on here.
--"If we're going to get content on the 'Net, somehow we're going to have to reward the people who put it on there," said Dave Farber, an Internet engineering pioneer and computer science professor at the University of Pennsylvania who is an independent consultant to the TCPA.--
Isn't that what money is for?
Why yes I am paranoid! Thanks for asking!
I don't see what the big deal with palladium is. Maybe I haven't become as scared[dual meaning, rule] as your typical /. reader over the years, but I personally have the following view: If MS seeks to control every aspect of the desktop, the masses will rebel. Unless, of course they do it in such a way that a great majority are happy with it. In which case it comes down to best tool for the job. If that's MS, use MS, if that's linux, use linux. If more people just thought that way, instead of MS is evil, Linux is great, or MS is good, Linux is too hard to use... etc. etc. then I think we could put all these wars to rest. It all comes down to that... best tool for the job.
Then again, *nix is an OS by developers, for developers, so I'm just a weee bit biased towards those variants...
The key to the enjoyment of pop music is to replace any instance of "love" with "C.H.U.D."
Fails at the first fence. If they're on someone else's computer, they're not his bits anymore...
Cheers,
Ian
Consumers used to vote with their dollars, no "balancing" was necessary
The problem is that the media and some technology corporations (like MS and Intel) are getting laws such as the DMCA passed that make voting with your dollars moot.
If it was not illegal to circumvent digital copy protection mechanisms, then there would be more such programs and devices available, and more people would have a taste of what will be taken away by something like palladium.
As it is, the DMCA makes it difficult to distribute mechanisms to bypass current DRM, so the huddled masses will see less of a difference when palladium arrives on their desktops. Most non-technical users already can't copy DRM-protected materials. Palladium will not mean much difference to them, so why should they bother voting against it with their dollars.
In addition to that, certain content will only be available on palladium, so in many cases, average non-technical users may actually have a reason to prefer it.
Ironically, it may be corporations who end up balking at palladium and potentially turning off some of the "security" features. Companies are likely to be very concerned with the idea of outside organizations having any type of "enforcement" accesss (or any other kind of access) to their computers.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
So what you are saying is that a "Trusted PC" is not a PC, but an Appliance that is mislabeled?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
FOR SALE: 1.5GHZ Motherboard. PRE DRM plus working PRE DRM Hard disk. Listen to, and watch want you want. Bids start at $1500.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Most western democracies have the governing power divided into three: the legislative power, the judicial power, and the executive power. This division is considered a good thing, since it prevents any part from gaining unconditional power, and we know that power corrupts.
/RS
Some people just can't stop trying to grap power.
Take the DMCA's anti-circumvention rules. The only purpose of these rules are to prevent people from breaking the copyright law. That is, it is the legislative power's attempt to act as executive power. Not surprisingly, the DMCA can be misused in innumerable ways.
Now consider Hardware Rights Control. Again it is an attempt by someone, this time entirely outside of the government, to grab executive power. The reason for using hardware is to prevent people from breaking the copyright law. Any other feature of DRM can be programmed in software as long as people are cooperative, so hardware is only needed *against* the users who are uncooperative (e.g., those who want to make use of their fair use rights). I will be surprised if there are not innumerable abuses of hardware DRM.
The unholy marriage of DMCA and DRM should remove the need for hardware DRM. After all, is the purpose of the DMCA not to prevent people from circumventing protections, so the digital rights are safe, right? But the legislative power of DMCA is not enough for the people who want to protect "content" from the users. They want another layer of protection to make it even harder to break the law.
When hardware DRM also fails, what will their next step be? My guess is surveilance of all media-capable devices (mandatory ofcourse).
Does that sound far fetched? they already did it!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
- SMJ - (It's not just a name: it's a bad aftertaste.)
"Don't Steal Music."
That will just plant a little kernel in the back of your head that says:
"Steal music? Hmmmm....thats a good idea."
I speculated about this a bit, and realised that it's probably the same kind of thing that the MPAA is trying to do to consumer home entertainment systems. From what I know, it means that if you choose NOT to use DRM features, you either lose the really high-quality (high-quality as in resolution, not high-quality as in content) stuff, or you are denied from viewing certain things.
[insert witty comment here]
Few people can grasp that there is nothing you can do to prevent hackers and virii from attacking your system
;-)
...) is equally harmful.
I've had considerable success with systems not connected to the internet
secure software can lock up data so that if some other software gets infected, the data is still safe
Not true. The virus can still delete, copy, and scramble the data. Deleting and scrambling is harmful to the owner of the data; copying it to someone who can decrypt the Palladium encryption (M$, the NSA,
when the crypto chip encrypts the data, it embeds a hash of the secure application in the data blob
So what is the definition of 'application' here? Is it the image of the application in memory? Is it the image of the application on disk? If true, does that mean that Palladium knows about (and indeed, enforces) a specific file system? What happens if you upgrade the application?
Either:
1) your explanation is wrong
2) Palladium is hardcoded for / enforces a specific OS
3) the OS is deeply involved in feeding the Palladium chip the right data.
If (3), my guess is that subverting it will be easy (just feed it incorrect data). If (2), the clock of technological progress is about to be stopped.
If they disagree, it does not allow the data to be decrypted
What would stop people from writing a software decryption?
if a virus infects a piece of software that has encrypted some secure data, it won't be able to decrypt it any more
Great - instead of just seeing some funny characters on your screen now all your data will be effectively lost! How's that for escalating a problem!
There's also a feature where the crypto chip can report the hash of some secure software to a remote server on the net
So the Palladium chip has a built-in TCP/IP stack as well?
*How* would this free us from spammers?
A side effect is that a media company could create data that is trusted - aka signed using PKI - so that only correspondigly signed code can access it. This of course is problematic because then that code would determine what rights to bestow the user.
This requires closed source software. You cannot have open source software restrict the rights of the user, that is the whole point of open source.
So basically you have admitted that this system will effectively lock out all open source programs that want to access trusted data.
That would passify most of the people angry about Palladium/TCPA/DRM.
I doubt it. Being forced to only choose closed source software to access any "trusted" data is going to piss a lot of people off, no matter if there is some mechanism of "fair use" or not.
There is a significant number of people who are simply against IP in all senses.
If you really think that all people who are opposed to DRM fall into this category, you are sorely mistaken. We want the freedom to access data with the programs that we choose, not the programs that some corporation forces us to choose. When a large chunk of the data on the net is "trusted", MS has effectively killed open source software.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Consumers still vote with their dollars (or whatever currency they are using...). And that's what I plan to do about DRM. I'll act as a consumer.
I buy "content" (whatever that is) because I expect something from it. I expect for instance information about something that matters to me. That's why I buy newspapers and endure advertisements on TV to watch the News. I expect something that helps me to get into a mood I like. Thar's why I listen to music or watch a melodramatic movie. I expect to hear someone else's opinion about a fact I can't really sort out myself. That's why I read commentaries and theatre critics. I am interested how a thought would work out if you think them further to the end. That's why I buy books of fiction. Or I just need some inspiration for myself. That's why I zap around on TV until I get to something that takes my attention. That's why I tune the radio until I get something that suits me. That's why I read some pages in a book and then put it back into the shelf.
Many of those things are very dependend on my mood. Sometimes I am too tired to watch the News. Sometimes I am to nervous to concentrate on a movie. Sometimes I just need someone with me to get into the mood for music. Sometimes I can't stand hypothetical or fictional situations because I am too occupied with my own situation.
There are just three ways for me to deal with "content". Either I can just take it whenever or wherever I want. That's why I buy books and CDs and videos. That's why there are News channels which constantly repeat the news over and over, so you can get many information within every 30min. Or it is something I have to be mentally prepared for. That's when I plan do go to a concert or a theatre. That's when I make a date with friends to have a private video night. And then there is the experimental way. Getting a bit from here, listening to a part from that, fiddling around with another thing, mixing two things together.
So for me there are three different kinds of "content". The one that's a commodity. Available wherever and whenever I want. The second one that's an event. With preparations and fixed timelines, unique and not to be repeated in the same way again. And the last one is like the big heap of stuff, where I walk around and turn some pages here, or just look at the covers there, take some random parts and make my own work from it.
So how fits DRM into this? It doesn't. It tells you that "content" is not a commodity. It is licensed per single consumption on a single place at a single time. It tells you that "content" isn't something that's unique. It can be repeated again and again, if you paid for it again and again. It is no single performance in a special environment. And it definitely isn't the big heap of stuff where you can walk around and get just some small parts here and fiddling arund with. It presents you with finished blocks that are unalterable. There are no ways to combine these things to new works. There is no way just to take that one sentence from here and the single tune from there. You always have to get the whole block, making experimental handling of the "content" virtually impossible or at least very, very expensive.
So my reaction is this: I don't buy DRM protected "content". It doesn't fit into my way to handle "content". DRM protected "content" is no offer to me that convinces me to pay money for. There is a whole world of unprotected "content" I have to explore before I feel the urge to look for the protected one. Whenever I see a "Top 100 books you should have read" list I see that I know no more than 30% of them. Whenever I stroll through a flea market I see music I never listened to. There are concerts and theatres everywhere I can go to to have a unique and nonrepeatable experience.
So I am just a consumer. I have a limited amount of money to spend. I plan to spend it on stuff that suits me. I can easily ignore offers. "Content" is nothing I need for life like food and water and housing an clothing. But if there is a "content provider", who wants to fiddle with my life and with my freedom and with my way to do things even though I really don't want his offerings, then I just get angry and tell him to piss off. I don't have any relation to him. So he should keep out of my way.
And to most people, it makes total sense then to ban those anonymous, crime-friendly pc's. I suppose the silver lining is, we could at least free ourselves of spammers. So it's a tough call ;-)
It isn't a tough call at all, as there are already ways of freeing yourself from SPAMMERs that don't require you to give up your basic freedoms.
Besides, do you really think Palladium is going to 'free' you from SPAM. Given the track record of Microsoft's email services (hotmail, etc) I think it is more likely you are going to be receiving SPAM adverts from Microsoft "strategic" partners, and perhaps anyone who pays the piper appropriately, and with 'trusted' computing, maybe what won't be trusted won't be the SPAM, it will be the SPAM assissin software that otherwise would have let you filter the crap out of your inbox.
One thing is absolutely certain. Whichever way that particular battle on your Palladium Trusted Computer goes, it won't be your choice. It will be Microsoft's choice.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
actually, no. you can have open source software, you just can't compile and run it yourself. the binary has to be signed by the appropriate authority. this is what is so insidious about palladium. it doesn't stop open source software from existing, it just makes it useless.
The worst of all is that people will be forced to use Palladium or TCPA machines, when laws like CBDTPA (the former SSSCA) will be passed.
Thus, sooner or later, the right to share will be outlawed, and people will no longer be able to "turn DRM off".
When no TCPA-free or Palladium-free hardware will be available and the ISPs will only allow TCPA machines to be connected to the Internet, there will be no alternative.
The worst of all, most of the people are totally unaware that many of their freedoms are about to be stolen.
For an introduction see:
http://action.eff.org/tinseltown/
http://www.eff.org/IP/SSSCA_CBDTPA/
TCPA / Palladium Frequently Asked Questions
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/rja14/tcpa-faq.html
"The Right to Read" by Richard M. Stallman.
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
(The important thing about this story is that it was written before the DMCA was even proposed!)
"What's Wrong With Copy Protection" by John Gilmore.
http://cryptome.org/jg-wwwcp.htm
Palladium is almost here: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/09/03/18592
Everyone needs to start referring to Palladium
as "restricted" computing, rather than "secure" or "trusted". It is more accurate, and will
better serve to explain to people in a word what they are getting railroaded into accepting.
People need to understand the power of words in this battle. This is a battlefield of ideas, and we are losing the battle, because of the massive PR machine of Microsoft and Hollywood.
When laws such as CBDTPA will be passed, you will not be able to "disable" TCPA and install anything but a TCPA compliant OS, like Palladium or maybe some DRM Linux from HP http://cryptome.org/tcpa-rja2.htm
>Technology companies must carefully balance individual rights and corporate interests, says Bruce Schneier, cryptography expert and chief technology officer at Counterpane Internet Security, a network monitoring firm
Here's my careful balance: Individual rights come first, Corporate interests come dead last!
Read the GPL. Yes trolls, whine about the GPL being viral, but the GPL is designed exactly to prevent this kind of things! There's no way anybody can get away with this legally.
The government can use the software internally, but if they want to distribute it, then they must GPL and release the source code of any modified GPL'ed program!
It's like "fair abd balanced story" about, say, KKK. Some things just should be never encouraged.
... the list I think could include just about everyone not a part of that particular fringe) would express their opinion, all against a factual context of what is being discussed.
You seem to suffer from the mistaken notion that 'fair and balanced' must yield an appearance of equal legitimacy, or must include equal promotion of both sides of an issue.
While that is often the case for issues that are complex, or where one side is about as correct as the other, or both sides have good points on some issues, it is just as often not the case for issues where one side is clearly out of social or ethical bounds.
A fair and biased report will allow both sides to express their opinions, with best results achieved when those opinions are set against undisputed facts, or disputed facts with the disputes (and evidence pro and con) clearly presented. Scientific programs on Discovery and PBS often do this quite well.
To use your example of the KKK, a fair and unbiased report would allow the KKK to express their philosophy and opinion, a counter group (the NAACP, the ACLU, or others
Unless the factual data are deliberately manipulated (in which case the reporting is no longer fair and unbiased), in the KKK case they are almost certain to come off looking like the rascist dolts that they are, while whoever is arguing against them is likely to appear to be a saint. Why? Because all of the factual information about humanity, all of the historical information we have, in short, just about anything and everything that could be cited in providing a factual context for the discussion, will almost certainly tend to repudiate the KKK perspective and underscore the opposing perspective.
So, as you can no doubt see, providing fair and unbiased coverage of the KKK is probably the last thing a proponent of the KKK would want to see. Such vermin are certainly no excuse for making an exception in a critical aspect of journalistic ethics, one that already is all too often ignored.
Indeed (disclosure: I am speaking as an athiest) I suspect one of the prominent reasons for the erosion of "fair and unbiased" reporting is that, whenever it is done in a scientific or religious context, some very powerful organizations, and their followers, have their world views challenged and perhaps even debunked when presented in a fair and unbiased manner. Whether it is war time politics, the exposure of monsanto's latest poison in our food chain, or simple religious ferver, I think the political price for fair and unbiased reporting has become the primary cause of journalistic decay, moreso even than the inherent 'decline' of journalistic ethics, if indeed the latter is the case. Of course, something like this is purely supposition, and quickly decays into a chicken and egg argument, but it is a point worth pondering nonetheless.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
1. China may be able to ignore the GPL within their own country, but if IBM or any other company ever offers it as a retail product in a country that enforces copyright treaties, they'll still have to release source under the GPL.
2. Lack of copyright protection cuts both ways. The Chinese may be able to ignore the GPL and not release their source code, but all it takes is one disgruntled coder smuggling their source to a public place. Any such code would be free for the taking; and it'd be completely legal to do so.
3. The Chinese would be foolish to fork their Linux project too far away from the rest of the world. As long as it remains closely related to our Linux, they can take advantage of all of the work being done internationally. Make it too different and they begin to lose those resources. See (2) for why this eventually benefits us.
Flamebait? Jeez, who's doing the modding? The above post is so true that it should be modded +3 insightful, at least.
In reaction to the discovery, Microsoft marketing announced that it has decided to rename Palladium, which has the phonetically-challenged abbreviation Pd, to Fuukoffium (abbrev. Fu) because, in the words of a spokesman, "the abbreviation F-U seemed to convey so perfectly how people feel about the new OS".
Sigs are bad for your health.
I think my thoughts on this matter can be described with the following quote.
"I'm sorry Dave, I can't do that".
I live in a giant bucket.
Where did you get this from? Apple sure haven't gone out of their way to make this position public... I haven't heard or seen a mumblin' word about it. Got a link? I'd be happy to hear it, but I don't believe that Apple has made any such statement.
"If we're going to get content on the 'Net, somehow we're going to have to reward the people who put it on there," said Dave Farber"
How about fuck "getting content on the 'Net'" How about leaving the fucking net alone. How about you find another fucking place to sell your fuckin content or you get the fuck off OUR net! How about using the already fuckin DRACONIAN laws to protect your fuckin content or shut the fuck up and get the hell off our net. How about NOT fuckin with our chips and hardware or we will not buy them.
And finally...
How about a nice baseball bat with lots of slivers shoved up your fuckin ass if you keep this shit up.
Well, I was to a Microsoft campus once and saw posters up asking users to please use software to look for culturally offensive words. These posters were being pushed by, guess who? Microsoft China ;)
My point is that Bill's choice of words ("addicted") was far worse that a simple poor choice of words and has really hurt Microsoft in that region with respect to anti-piracy enforcement (that and the fact that they were fighting their bigest anti-piracy case in history when the US accidently bombed the Chinese embassy in Serbia).
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
I've yet to see an explanation (other than "It's Magic!") of how a Palladium/TCPA/Fritz-chipped computer will end up more secure against viruses and worms. For starters, note that the most prevalent viruses for the last several years have affected *macros*, and assume that the "worms" they talk about are things like Klez, SirCam and etc, basically Outlook viruses.
Certainly in a Fritzed Palladium computer, software like Word and Outlook will have "certification". I mean, MSFT will certify their own software, right? The Word macro virus just gets interpreted by the certified Word executable. Similarly, Klez would just cause the "certified" Outlook executable to do certain things.
Given that any computing system that is Turing-complete can support viruses, how does Palladium make a system resistant to them? Is a Palladium system just not Turing-complete? Will "certified" executables not have features like scripting languages, macros, etc built into them?
Quit playing Monopoly with Bill. Switch to one of many non-Microsoft products today.
... But the real sea change will come when your age group eventually become managers in significant numbers. I own my own small business and am also an employee of another consulting firm, and we use Linux in both businesses, but my high level of interest in alternative OS's is not all that common for my age group (45). Most just prefer the status quo, if they even care about computers at all.
The good thing is that today's recent graduates have much more of an interest OSS and alternative operating systems, and when they enter management, it will almost certainly coincide with Linux being much more "desktop ready" than it currently is, and this should help the trend accelerate even faster.
From the article:
"What may be perceived as minor intrusions in a Western corporate setting might have Big Brother consequences for computer users in countries with more controlled environments like China and Saudi Arabia."
Since the US is democracy, controlling everything you see is a minor intrusion. Since other countries are dictatorships, it become "Big Brother". And since this a "corporate setting", this can't be double speak. But if the government of Indonesia said it then....
BSOD's stopped being funny to me after the first 10,000 times that I got a BSOD (about 2 weeks of Win 95 operation IIRC). Oh, and the poster's name is not Jack, it's Malduin.
It is hardcoded for a specific system, Windows, that is. You must remember that Palladium != TCPA even if MS wants you to think so. Palladium is an implementation of TCPA.
E
Marxist evolution is just N generations away!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The fairness of the article is another story. Was it fair to quote Dave Farber as supporting Paladium,
"If we're going to get content on the 'Net, somehow we're going to have to reward the people who put it on there," ? I doubt it. He's a member of the EFF and no one paid him to put HIS web page up. Yet the article quotes him as above and then mixes that up with Pladium as if it had his blessing.
Is it fair to portray the whole debate as one over "protecting" crap like movies and mass produced music on set top boxes? No, it's not but that's what the silly article does. By confusing many trivial things with more serious issues the article makes it look like free software and privacy advocates are simply paranoid. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The truth is that powerful corporate intersts are proposing the most unAmerican set of laws ever. Paladium and other "secure" computing platforms pushed by law will result in the most powerful censorship system ever devised by any tyrant ever. All future communications will be electronic. "Secure" computing will insure that all electronic publications will be controled. As the means already exist for document control when needed and those means can be used without coersion, the goals of new "secure" computing laws can not be as stated. Journalists who don't realize this have not done their homework and are incapable of presenting anything in a "fair and balanced" manner.
I'm not a consumer, I'm a citizen. Whenever you see an article about "consumer rights" you know the author is an idiot.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Actually that is a good comparison. When the Social Security Act was originally passed it was against the law to use the SSN for anything else because so many people feared the things that would come from a universal number on everyone. And now you can't exist without one.
This crap will be the same. When introduced it is 'totally optional' and 'totally in the control of the owner.' Five years later, somehow Bill becomes the 'owner' and you can't actually use your PC for much without opting into the DRM. Give em half a chance and most ISP's will be running a new & improved PPP that uses DRM so nobody connect to MSN^H^H^H The Internet without Palladium.
btw, now you DO have to get the kids an SSN or you can't claim them as dependents on your tax return or get them admitted to a public school. I hear the hospitals have to start the paperwork before they can allow you take a kid home these days. So much for optional.
Democrat delenda est
If some of you people would stop acting so paranoid, you would see that Palladium will be a good thing. Increasing the trust and security of the PC will the Internet to the next level and truly allow it to be a commerce engine. No one will be forced to use Palladium or DRM. It will be opt in. This means you will have a choice. What could be more fair than that. Many of you geeks complain about the wholes in windows and msft products in general, and now when they come up with a dymanmic solution, you still complain. You can't have it both ways.