AMD Opteron to support Palladium

Jim Norton writes "This article is just a reminder that AMD is just as guilty as Intel in supporting TCPA / Palladium. AMD has announced that Opteron will be compatible with the Palladium Initiative and that AMD is part of the 'Trusted Computing Alliance'."

Comments

Mostly a political gesture

[fault0]

It's not that companies like AMD and Intel particularly like this effort. As hardware/chip/part manufacturers, it's just more work for them. They support the inititive because they need to stay on Microsoft's good side in the up coming x86-64/itanium battle.

Re:Mostly a political gesture

[Florian Weimer]

It's not that companies like AMD and Intel particularly like this effort.

AFAIK, the Trusted PC started as a project for business use. Software developers could move security checks to the client if it's "trusted" without getting grilled by those strange security people who might accidentally look at the code. So there was (and still is) some market demand.

It just happened that you can sell the same technology to the copyright industry (as "copy control") and to the consumer (as "virus prevention"). I doubt that the technology will match such requirements, but we'll see.

Needs to be said....

[dalassa]

Not to be Trolling or anything...

But every one should switch to the bunny foo-foo Macintosh. :-)

*pats G4*

Re:Needs to be said....

[An Onerous Coward]

/me starts handing out copies of Yellow Dog Linux.

Here, this'll ease the pain.

Re:Needs to be said....

[Colin Bayer]

If you don't think Apple will be up against the wall like everyone else, implementing some form of DRM, you're deluded. Once content begins to be released with DRM restrictions, Apple will have to make a competing implementation, or else you'll find your precious lickable G4 unable to run an increasing number of things. The only technologies that could survive without DRM (assuming the CBDTPA doesn't pass) would be those that don't share a market with Windows, and they are very few indeed.

Re:Needs to be said....

[Colin Bayer]

As long as people are running windows 98 on non-DRM hardware this will never fly past the drawing board. People will not upgrade thier computers to view content and if they are forced to that content will never catch on.

It depends on the magnitude and the quality of the content offered. The mythical Joe Sixpack just might go out and buy a new computer if he could watch every new feature film for the low, low price of $3 a viewing, or put together custom CDs for half the price of CDs he picks up in stores; that is, he might if he's a big enough consumer.

This whole process will happen over such a long period of time that it is completely consevable that it will take Apple just as much time to gain a signifigant percentage of market share then it would DRM enabled computer to catch on en mass.

To paraphrase, it's also completely conceivable that monkeys could fly out of my butt.

Apple computers are not yet at the "commodity" price point, whereas PCs are. Is Joe Sixpack going to go out and buy a $999 eMac/iMac when Gateway has a Profile 4 for $699? Is he going to bother learning Mac OS X, then get pissed off when none of his Windows apps work, or buy another Windows box and neatly get out of having to buy new software? (Remember, Joe Sixpack has heard of neither Linux nor BSD, and he has no clue what open-source software is.)

Where does that leave us? Media vendors will be selling content to too few people and end up folding purely due to the fact that there is not enough demand for the conent.

If a significant fraction of 95% of the consumer retail market switches to the Mac platform for no reason other than they look pretty (and lack this "DRM" thing that's going to get rid of hackers and terrorists.) If you can somehow convince that market that this "Palladium" thing is morally wrong, even though it allows them to watch TV on their computers.

This whole situation hinges on two things:

1) Palladium gets introduced as a major trend in computers.

2) Microsoft royally fucks something up.

3) Both 1) and 2) occur before Apple/IBM/Motorola/the Trilateral Commission succumb to market pressures and come up with a TCPA/Palladium-compliant DRM implementation.

If, and only if, these things happen, and people see that their Wintel boxen aren't running all the things they used to, will people switch to unencumbered platforms. Pray that they do.

Re:Needs to be said....

[SurfsUp]

Yes, and you can run Linux on it just fine. Not only that, but some of these Apple products are getting into the price competitive zone as well, especially the server products.

The key item here though, is the PPC, which so far has no DRM in its guts. This has caused me to change my plans re what I design new projects around.

Plus, rumours are flying of new, power-efficient PPCs for desktop and embedded use. As far as I'm concerned, that tears it. As soon as these hit the market, it's goodbye Intel, there no longer is any reason to stay with the bad old bad old. And so long as AMD sticks to their DRM guns, it's goodbye AMD too.

Re:Needs to be said....

[rseuhs]

The mythical Joe Sixpack just might go out and buy a new computer if he could watch every new feature film for the low, low price of $3 a viewing, or put together custom CDs for half the price of CDs he picks up in stores; that is, he might if he's a big enough consumer.

Or he could just save the money for a new computer, save the money for the movie and the CDs and continue to download everything from edonkey/napster/gnutella.

In what world are you living?

Re:Needs to be said....

[dalassa]

The same way I run Word right now, by finding the Word app in my applications folder and clicking twice. If Apple doesnt go to a DRM Microsoft will continue to write Office for it.

Re:Needs to be said....

[inkswamp]

If you don't think Apple will be up against the wall like everyone else, implementing some form of DRM, you're deluded. Once content begins to be released with DRM restrictions, Apple will have to make a competing implementation, or else you'll find your precious lickable G4 unable to run an increasing number of things.

Sure, but the point the original poster was probably making was that if people begin switching to other platforms (not even necessarily Macs) and begin moving away from companies implementing DRM, then that takes power away from those companies.

Vote with your consumer dollars. Don't buy DRM-tainted content. Don't buy DRM-crippled hardware. And fercrissake, if you don't like what MS or AMD are doing, take the money you would have spent on them and put it in the hands of another company whose philosophy more closely matches your own. No company will hold to this kind of thing if they see their bottom line eroding as a result and once they achieve their goals (and whether or not the goals of DRM can be achieved is a big debate), if 50% of their former users have moved on to other options, how much power will they have? They won't be the de facto standard if people begin examining the options that are available.

If you RTFA...

[gatesh8r]

Yeah, they're doing this, but...

Bit by bit, digital freedom disappears

By Nathan Cochrane
September 17 2002
Next

Another stage in Microsoft's five-year plan to control our PCs and the Internet will kick off early next year with the launch of Advanced Micro Devices' latest chip, Opteron, aimed at business uses.

The new microprocessor, which will run both existing 32-bit applications and specially recompiled 64-bit programs, will support "Palladium", a set of security and privacy features Microsoft is building into its products. Both AMD and Microsoft are members of the Trusted Computing Platform Alliance (TCPA), a cabal of 170 product makers developing a uniform approach to security and copyright protection. AMD has been working on the "trusted client" approach with Wave Systems Corp for two years.

AMD's chips will increase the security of those accessing programs and the Internet, says company marketer Patrick Moorhead. But it will also refuse to play certain content if it is not digitally signed by Microsoft or an authorised party.

For the end-to-end security features to work as envisioned by the TCPA, all parties along the network chain must build in complementary security features. Chips from the likes of AMD and Intel will only decode information, such as audio and video, if it comes with an unlocking key. Hard-drive makers will make drives that won't record certain types of information, and so on.

It is envisaged that once the TCPA system is fully functioning, our PCs would quietly report to authorities any unauthorised content on our machines. PCs and other devices would also refuse to play content, such as a music CD, tied to another device, and may be instructed by a remote server to delete information from the owner's hard drive.

Moorhead, AMD's vice-president of consumer advocacy, dismisses consumer complaints that the ever-tightening noose designed to stop online piracy, known as Digital Rights Management (DRM), will erode existing rights.

But he says AMD believes that these technologies should be "opt-in" - that the user should control it - not government mandates.

Hollywood and the music industry are lobbying hard to make DRM mandatory in all new devices, and existing laws here and in the US make it a crime to switch it off.

Moorhead says the end user has been "unfairly branded" as a thief, and he believes most people would buy content online if it was available but it is being held back by a skittish film and recording industry.

But Dan Bricklin, computing pioneer and co-developer of the world's first popular spreadsheet, VisiCalc, says attempts to copy-protect works are a "simple fix" to preserve out-dated business models.

Further, he wrote, using legislation to bolster technological methods would be "bad for society", hobbling technology.

"Copy protection, like poor environment and chemical instability before it for books and works of art, looks to be a major impediment to preserving our cultural heritage."

Re:If you RTFA...

[Beliskner]

Every now and again something happens that makes us citizens have to start everything again from scratch. I say FSF buys the Altera FPGA kit, and we design our own processor (I hope to God that Intel doesn't keep the OP-codes secret that relate to Palladium).

We can program the FPGA with Intel instruction set compatibility, where Palladium instructions would be ignored, or design an add-on chip (like the old Pentium Turbo snap-on chips) which would detect the Palladium opcodes on the FSB and skirt around them. Whoa, am I violating the DMCA by suggesting this?

Government + Corporations versus Consumers, Saddam is just a distraction

Re:If you RTFA...

[rosewood]

I posted this in another thread but again, from hardocp.com

Comments that looked like they were from Pat Moorhead on an Aussie Web site are not from Pat Moorhead, the firm has just told us.In fact, according to an AMD UK representative, AMD's Opteron products will run any kind of content in the future -- contrary to the report in The Age, on which our original report, below, was based.

Part of the content in The Age failed to distinguish between comments Moorhead made and conjecture, AMD said. AMD, in fact, claims it is the "good guy", and even though it is a member of the "trusted computing" initiative, will allow users to opt in whether to use this type of technology or not. "There is nothing [in Hammer] that could actually prevent a user running unlicensed content," the representative from AMD said MM.

Re:If you RTFA...

[El Rey]

Just get a Transmeta processor and hack the Pentium emulation layer...

Re:If you RTFA...

[Beliskner]

Just get a Transmeta processor and hack the Pentium emulation layer...

If they're still in business, by creating circumventable devices they're breaching the DMCA, they can be swatted like a fly by Hollywood. Then to rub salt in the wound, they can put Stallone into a movie about it - evil corporation tries to steal music like uhhh the Taliban and terrorists, and then gets destroyed by Stallone, who bursts into Transmeta HQ with a Gatling gun, and says, "You took all of our movies away, think you're a wise guy? Mickey Mouse says differrent, eat lead asshole. I'm gonna take our movies back from your evil clutches! Pluto Nash will destroy you"

Re:If you RTFA...

[Beliskner]

While government and corporations working together against consumers is HIGHLY undesirable, it's not like they are GASSING us

Uhhhh, clearly you are a victim of CNN propoganda, I thought this phenomenon would go away with the advent of the Internet, but apparently people prefer to regard foreign news sites such as Samachar as trash. Even the Internet cannot beat human nature (the people that use it) same as airbags can't beat a teenager driving off a cliff at 100mph.

Well, OK here's a quote from this article, my attempt to stick a crowbar between your eyelids and prise them open just a little so you see a glimpse of the *real* world.

Testimony from Nicaragua highlighted how "development," foreign investment and the debt have been used as tools by the North to control and exploit Southern nations, their natural resources, and their workforce. In addition, the jury heard that between 1980 and 1988 the US, despite international rulings against such interference, financially propped up the illegal Contra forces and engaged in "low-intensity warfare" by providing them with more than $100 million dollars, thereby contributing to an extensive armed conflict that cost over 50,000 lives and inflicted a high ecological cost. In 1983 oil deposits in Benjamin Zeledon Port were bombed creating huge contamination areas. Moreover Contra forces placed 81, 626 anti-personal mines between 1982 and1989, creating not only a huge danger to local communities but also inhibiting potential local agricultural production.

Testimony from Angola noted that Angola is a resource-rich country being a producer of oil, diamonds and minerals. Alongside this wealth, the country has suffered four wars in the last 40 years, with the last war creating an unprecedented military debt which was illegally financed by governments and multinationals. Today 60 percent of the country's budget goes to service the debt and keep the war machine functioning. Ironically, the G8 countries sold weapons to both sides in the conflict, all the while imposing adjustment policies which left the Angolan people to bear the brunt of both military and economic warfare. The testimony concluded by lamenting that Angola is now considered the worst country for a child to be born in. In the capital city, every 100 metres you'll find a child on the street who is either orphaned or mutilated by one of the landmines financed by the very same countries which house the major creditor institutions.

Illegitimacy of Debt based on the Nature of Contracting Parties, Processes, Terms and Usage Three sub-categories of illegitimate debt were introduced: debt amassed through fraudulent means and operations such as embezzlement; odious debts; and the illegitimacy of usurious interest rates.

Fraud
Debt incurred through fraud, including fraudulent operations and terms between transnational banks and Southern elites whereby some entrepreneurs or speculators contracted loans and deposited the money in external banks instead of investing in their own countries. Other loans simply disappeared or could not be accounted for. Many times 'private' loans wound up being converted into public loans, placing an unjust burden on the people of the South.

Odious Debts
The legal doctrine of odious debts as part of international law, is understood to be debts contracted for illegitimate purposes by illegitimate parties. This debt becomes odious for the entire population, it is not an obligation of the state, but rather "a regime's debt, a personal debt of the power that has incurred it, consequently it falls with the fall of this power." (Adams, Patricia: 1991) International Financial Institutions (IFIs), transnational banks and Northern governments knowingly provided support for military dictators by propping them up financially and through loose lending restrictions. For example, under the International Convention on the Repression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid, and the UN General Assembly adopted sanctions against the regime and yet, in flagrant violation of these mechanisms, the World Bank and the IMF continued to lend money to the South African regime.

As a result, the people of South Africa are being revictimized by apartheid as they are forced to bear the apartheid regime's unlawful debt. M.P. Giyose of South Africa asserted that, "No foreign loan granted to South Africa during the apartheid years could have been legitimate because the apartheid state was itself illegitimate; and any attempt to claim ignorance of this fact would not be credible. This single circumstance means that no lender would have a valid claim against democratic South Africa for any loans outstanding from the apartheid years."

Usury The charge of usury and usurious interest rates was introduced as a source of illegitimate debt. The interest payments charged on much of the Southern debt are much higher than normal levels which has led to continuous increases of external debt rather than decreases. In addition, excessive and disproportionate commissions and costs were charged. Between 1985 and 1989 the real long term interest rate in six Northern countries was on average 4.35% compared to the average real rate of interest paid on the external debt by 6 Southern countries which was 16.8% (UNDP 1992)

Evidence from Testimony: Testimony from Nigeria that had little or no external debt prior to the mid-eighties, attested to how the debt problem was aggravated by mismanagement and wide-scale corruption. Before the military took over power in 1983, Nigeria's external debt was $8.93 billion dollars. By 1985 it had risen dramatically to $19.55 billion and by 1995 to $34.1 billion dollars. The testimony carefully details close to 30 different loans and projects that cannot be accounted for such as: the "Arochukwu-Ohafia Water Scheme, Warri Farm Project" and the "Kaduna bus project" where state officials claim no knowledge of the loan

Now read an article here about the Bhopal accident, and then the company did it again in Australia so the company had to move again, like Kazaa. Here's another article about Shell which gives 20% to Nigeria, and keeps 80% profit (so a barrel of gas costs $20, Nigeria actually gets paid $4 per barrell) and has killed people for money.

Shell has blood on its name in Nigeria. Shell has a drilling operation in Nigeria, and half of the oil produced in Nigeria is produced by Shell. Oil makes up 80% of the government revenue and 90% of Nigeria's exports, so the country is very economically dependent on Shell. For years, the Ogoni people who worked for Shell and lived near the land being drilled witnessed their land and communities being polluted by levels of toxins 700 times higher than emissions allowed in Europe and dealing with Shell-hired Nigerian military forces that prevented them from protesting the exploitation (Shell has officially admitted to this, even!). In the early nineties, the Ogoni people rebelled led by Ken Saro-Wiwa and 8 other Ogoni leaders and succeeded in driving Shell off of 404 square miles of their homeland (power to the people!). However, about 3,000 Ogoni people died and 30,000 were internally displaced in this struggle (estimate from the World Council of Churches), all because of Shell. However, in 1994 the leaders were arrested and in late 1995, after a trial that was considered by many to be a farce, were hanged. Since then the struggle has died out as Shell and the Nigerian military are together keeping strict tabs over the people and the area in order to prevent further uprising and continue with oil operations. This has resulted in fatal military raids on communities, resulting in the death of innocent Ogoni people. Nigeria is run by a military dictator who generally squanders the profits from oil and uses it to fund his military to continue to persecute the Nigerian people. Shell has still not changed their policies in Nigeria despite worldwide protest.

As if Nigeria wasn't enough, Shell is also exploring drilling sites in Peru and Colombia in remote areas inhabited only by the native people of these nations. Finding themselves helpless next to the corporate power of Shell, the people are witnessing their land and way of life being destroyed by the rapid construction of oil drilling sites. Shell obviously does not care for the welfare of the people and their land in its oil endeavors and as Nigeria shows there's no limit to how far they'll take it in order to make profit! So, boycott Shell! For more information, check out CorpWatch, which keeps a keen eye on all shady corporate activity, at www.corpwatch.org and Project Underground, a site dedicated to exposing the exploitation of oil companies and protecting communities from it, at www.moles.org.

Sorry, but there's a good reason why Government heads and Corporate heads don't sleep well at night.

Re:If you RTFA...

[Jester99]

Even if they keep the opcodes secret, legal precident is set that double-blind blackboxing is a legal method to reverse-engineer a system. The GNU project, if it wanted to, could surely reverse engineer all the opcodes for Palladium.

(FYI, double-blind blackboxing is a process of reverse engineering in which one team of engineers "poke at" an existing system to determine how it operates under certain conditions. A second team, which never actually directly interacts with the system they're trying to copy, then uses a report created by the first team to implement the cloned system.)

#include /*(IANAL)*/

Re:If you RTFA...

[Beliskner]

madman that has used chemical and biological weapons on his own citizenship. Believe what you want, but Saddam Hussein is a VERY dangerous individual. And if you want to keep it in the media realm, I'm sure he's not all that supportive of freedom to watch what you want when you want either

Bwa ha ha! Saddam is ten thousand miles away, at worst he'll sink an aircraft carrier. A worse threat is Scientology, they are INSIDE the United States and in my opinion they're a militant sleeper cell, which is openly growing in the guise of a religious sect. When they're large enough they'll grab a few Senators and do something. At least Hollings is open, and his intentions are transparent (make Hollywood money 'cos they gave me a big cheque), but what are the Senators doing that Scientology supports?

Re:If you RTFA...

[Beliskner]

legal precident is set that double-blind blackboxing is a legal method to reverse-engineer a system. The GNU project, if it wanted to, could surely reverse engineer all the opcodes for Palladium

So then Hollings has to put a couple of Supreme Court judges on his expenses sheet, paid by Hollywood, big deal. Unix man and Linux man are just gonna sit on /. and bitch about it, they're not gonna lobby congress unlike Micro$oft - which is why Micro$oft have the money. It'll be real cool to see a Unix admin standing in front of the Supreme court trying to fight against DMCA2, he'll probably sweat and shake himself to death ;-)

Re:If you RTFA...

[Beliskner]

Micro$oft and Hollings will force us to upgrade our Win9x and Win2k by training and paying for hack3rs in Iraq (much like Saudi Arabia funded Al Qaeda). These hackers will release a cross-platform worm which will destroy Win9x and Win2k systems, forcing users to upgrade. Since these operating systems will have been "retired" by Micro$oft, no patch for the vulnerability would be released. WinXP2-DRM would be imperveous to the vulnerability, so all users will upgrade to it with Palladium hardware only. Of course, linux won't run on Palladium hardware, so linux will be destroyed.

And FPGA compatible x86 would not be a very compelling product. You could emulate it in software on another CPU (not involved in the Palladium deal) much faster

What other CPU? in the future AMD and Intel will make only DRM chips, it'll be illegal to import DMCA circumvention CPUs (unless explicitly for embedded), all other CPU companies will be shut down by the DMCA for making circumvention devices.

That leaves us with... Motorola 68000, so are you saying that x86 emulation on a Motorolla 68000 will be faster than an x86 FPGA?

Re:If you RTFA...

[Beliskner]

I don't hate America, what I do hate is the lack of education there which causes the populace to be completely ignorant about international affairs, which in turn causes the politicians to be ignorant of international affairs (as the legislature represents the people). The kids in India and Japan are doing differential Calculus when they're 8 years old (I kid you not), so naturally the Americans envy and hate the H-1Bs. I know that in India someone that gets an SAT of 1599 is a failure and will become a whino, but someone that gets 1600 (the maximum) *might* get into a good University and then if he's really really good might become a H-1B.

At the end of the day if everybody on /. got a million dollars in exchange for shutting up and letting DMCA and CDBPPTA pass, the /. crowd would change their opinions overnight except for RMS and a few other exceptions.

Democracy works - that's the problem with America. At least don't lie to yourself - if some faceless Ethiopean 10000 miles away is gonna get killed so that you can have an extra $100 tax rebate, you're not gonna care, and you're definitely not gonna heckle your Senator over it. That's why the media self-censors, you don't even *want* to know. Your 1st Amendment and therefore your Constitution died long ago, so America should get off its high horse.

Addendum

[Ridge]

Note that apparently the Opteron (Autobots, transform!), will support untrusted/unlicensed content as well. [neowin.net].

Story is Incorrect (perhaps)

[whovian]

AMDZone says differently:

Update: AMD has contacted The Inquirer and indeed Opteron will not support Palladium. Apparently that was some creative writing on the part of the outfit that posted the story.

Re:Story is Incorrect (perhaps)

[whovian]

AMDmb adds further:

AMD's Opteron won't reject unlicensed content - Ron Goldin - Fri, Sep 20, 2002 - 10:46 AM
Palladium... just that word sends shivers down my spine.. but it seems AMD is trying to smooth things over a bit and take away the shakes.
In fact, according to an AMD UK representative, AMD's Opteron products will run any kind of content in the future -- contrart to the report in The Age, on which our original report was based.
Part of the content in The Age failed to distinguish between comments Moorhead made and conjecture, AMD said. [emphasis added]
Source: The Inquirer - More Information

Re:Story is Incorrect (perhaps)

[manyoso]

No, they will support Palladium. AMD's update does not indicate that they won't, rather it says they will have an 'Opt-In' policy.

I hope that they define 'Opt-In' policy as a choice the consumer can make at purchase whether to include the DRM chip at all. I personally do not want any DRM chips on my future processors... disabled or not!

Re:Story is Incorrect (perhaps)

[rosewood]

From HardOCP.com

Comments that looked like they were from Pat Moorhead on an Aussie Web site are not from Pat Moorhead, the firm has just told us.In fact, according to an AMD UK representative, AMD's Opteron products will run any kind of content in the future -- contrary to the report in The Age, on which our original report, below, was based.

Part of the content in The Age failed to distinguish between comments Moorhead made and conjecture, AMD said. AMD, in fact, claims it is the "good guy", and even though it is a member of the "trusted computing" initiative, will allow users to opt in whether to use this type of technology or not. "There is nothing [in Hammer] that could actually prevent a user running unlicensed content," the representative from AMD said MM.

Re:Story is Incorrect (perhaps)

[Dwonis]

I hope that they define 'Opt-In' policy as a choice the consumer can make at purchase whether to include the DRM chip at all. I personally do not want any DRM chips on my future processors... disabled or not!

Having a pin on the processor that you can tie low/high (eg, with a jumper on the mobo or whatever) would be sufficient. AMD can't just leave a big hole in a CPU. They probably have to redesign. Even if they didn't, AMD would have to change their assembly line to support double of everything. It's simply not going to happen.

Re:Story is Incorrect (perhaps)

[ackthpt]

This is exactly why I didn't bother to submit it when I read it yesterday. I figured, heck, it's more BS and /. readers don't need to be bothered with it, but I did tack in on to the end of a post in a different topic. Guess I should have posted the red-herring and AMD's denial, but usually that sort of thing gets rejected. It's too often BS that gets posted. Go figure.

Re:Story is Incorrect (perhaps)

[serutan]

Yeah, and I love the way they correct themselves over at AMDZone -- the above quoted 2 lines are tacked onto the story, which still bears the headline, "Opteron to Support Palladium." If they took the time to add the correction, do you think they coulda stuck a "Not" in that headline?

Sigh.

Sad

[Aztek]

Sad they do this just to get microsofts support in the next windows for the hammer

OS support?

[nuggz]

Not a huge issue, just don't use an OS that supports Palladium.
Unless there is some killer feature Palladium has that makes unenabled OS's useless.

Re:OS support?

[spitzak]

You won't be able to purchase or sell on Ebay because the credit cards go through Passport which has been "security enhanced" so that it only talks to clients running Palladium.

Yes you will have to pay for the sample stream of the song. And that is IT, you will not be able to download anything. Why should they download anything when they can force you to pay each time to listen to it?

Re:OS support?

[spitzak]

You will have to get a new walkman that will play the new downloaded streams, and if you think it is going to play those an unlimited number of times you are seriously deluded.

There will be new machines that will play "old" CD's, but they will not play anything other than CD's and encrypted music files. Such a device can certainly determine that the data it is playing is coming off it's own laser, so you will at least have to burn a CD to get your music to play. But your new computer will not run the music-burning software! So you can use your old one, I guess. But the player may very well be able to detect writable CD's and refuse to play them. Well, I guess you can use your old player. Until it breaks, or until it needs batteries and you find that they have switched battery design to new "secure" batteries. And you better stock up on those CD blanks because the new ones will have a serial number burned into the CD directory area.

If MicroSoft's IE pops up enough "this may be an insecure transaction and you may lose your life savings, continue or cancel?" type questions you can bet such a huge number of idiots will switch to Passport that Ebay will have to support it. MicroSoft will then set it up so Passport users can be paid for their sales, but only if they buyers are Passport users. Suddenly Passport is required to buy on Ebay. It wouldn't even be very hard...

Support is optional

[Analysis Paralysis]

Ceck out the update on The Inquirer here. According to AMD, TCPA support will be optional, with users being able to opt out.

do like me

[kipple]

..start buying 'old' processors and set up your own cluster.. you won't need new CPU for a while :)

Re:do like me

[Beliskner]

Though you can bet that your processor is gonna be way too slow to run any future apps so you should probably start hoarding software too.

During prohibition, the mafia sold liquor to the citizens of the United States and the law was then withdrawn. Now we're getting digital prohibition, and the warez people will sell us DRM-hacked software and DRM will be withdrawn.

The mirror in history is almost beautiful.

Re:do like me

[kipple]

right now one p4 is enough. But if you have a couple dozen spare, in a year you'll need to use at least 2 of them together. Two years later you'll need to use 4 or maybe more. And so on. When the first one dies, you replace it.

Although I've never seen a processor 'die'... I still have 10-years old computers and processors running fine.

Nice try though.

Just Another Reason

[asv108]

To Run Linux on the opteron. Seriously, I think all these DRM moves by MS our great, /. should welcome them, it will just speed up the world migration to Linux. There even seems to be a lot more interest in Linux these past few weeks on usenet since certain "free" winxp installtions can't use sp1.

Re:Just Another Reason

[drinkypoo]

If you are using Windows XP Corp Edition with Key (FCKGW-RHQQ2-hehe) follow these instructions:

1. Run a system resore to create a new checkpoint in case you need it.
2. Run regedit and go to: HKey_Local_Machine\Software\Microsoft\WindowsNT\Cu rrentVersion\WPAEvents, on the right double click on "oobetimer" and change at least one digit of this value to deactivate windows.
3. Choose run from start menu and type in this command: %systemroot%\system32\oobemsoobe.exe /a to get the activation screen and go to the second option which is activate by phone.
4. In the new screen choose the option to change product key, and type in the new product key (72hhj-8yr4b-2xt62-tjgmv-jbp68)
5. If it brings you back to the prior screen after entering the new key click remind me later and then reboot.
6. Close that window, reboot your system and enter the command in step 2 for the second time to verify your activation , you should see "windows is already activated".
7. Now install SP1

If you have done this wrong or without a valid key you will not be able to boot. hit F8 and select last known good configuration.

Re:Opt out

[Verteiron]

That won't happen directly, it's too obvious. What could happen is this:

Law 1) Make it illegal to disable DRM unless the companies say you can (this is already in place).

Law 2) Make DRM mandatory in all hardware devices (currently being pushed hard by the ??AA).

Law 3) Require DRM hardware to ONLY run DRM-compliant software (not too hard to imagine).

Boom. That's the end of legal free (and Free) software in the USA. It would also be the end of programming as a hobby; programming would require expensive signatures in order to be allowed to run.

TCPA I can live with but palladium??

[Billly Gates]

TCPA is more strict then palladium but TCPA is founded by Intel, IBM, HP and a few other players who are more sympathetic to linux then Microsoft.

TCPA is already secretly installed by default on most IBM machines but the good news is you can turn it off and run linux on them. IBM is one of the biggest investors of TCPA and has also invested more then a billion into linux. They will make sure linux will run on TCPA hardware or that TCOA can easily be turned off. However microsoft's palladium will be built into memory modules and the cpu itself. Ouch. I do not know if you can turn these off. Microsoft's palladium faq states that you can still run old non trusted apps but admits linux can not run due ot legal rather then technical reasons. TCPA is more strict from a technical standpoint but it has proven itself that it can be easily disabled and I trust IBM a hell of alot more then Microsoft concerning my interests.

If worse comes to worse macs are always an option. It will take forever before apple is done designing motherboards with the new IBM powerpc chip's( last quarter 2003) which means g4's will stay for another year or two with slow memory access(sdram). Sure the new macs come with ddr but the internal chipset slows it down to sdram 133 speeds because the g4's suck so much.

Re:TCPA I can live with but palladium??

[zapfie]

Microsoft's palladium faq [microsoft.com] states that you can still run old non trusted apps but admits linux can not run due ot legal rather then technical reasons.

Maybe you should read your own links.. From the link you provided:

Q: Can Linux, FreeBSD or another open source OS run on "Palladium" hardware?

A: Virtually anything that runs on a Windows-based machine today will still run on a "Palladium" machine (there are some esoteric exceptions[1]). If you currently have a machine that runs both Linux and Windows, you would be able to have that same functionality on a "Palladium" machine.

What the FAQ does say is that it would be hard to create a similar trust architecture under Linux, due to patents and other legal reasons. Which is something I don't think most Linux users are gonna be missing anyway.

There's still hope...

[pVoid]

In these articles, destined at the general public, they state things like:

But it will also refuse to play certain content if it is not digitally signed by Microsoft or an authorised party.

I'm still very perplex by these assertions, since really, playing an mp3 has no tie to the kernel (you decode in user mode, you send to a wave device).

That implies that a) the chip will restrict access to the wave device, b) it will restrict access to files...

Both sound kinda ludicrous to me... Would that mean games will have to digitally sign their sound fx? If not, will the kernel have some way of knowing *what* a file contains (semantically)? CPUs are simple devices, they don't do stuff like "POUR cupofcoffe in eax IF coffeemaker = full" ... no they do simple stuff like "INC eax". I really think there will be ways to circumvent this thing pretty fast. What scares me is the fact that they think having such a chip will somehow assert the OS currently running has not been tampered with, and hence it can't be a malicsious OS... and at that point send in work loads from different users (basically making a big trusted network). This is just an invitation for mass viruses and global chaos.

OOO flamebait! I'll respond!

[narftrek]

Well if there are more factors as you say then WTF are they? Why don't you share a few with us?

I have one: AMD wants to stay in business. M$ is THE ONLY OS that works with most every peripheral and software package on a consistant basis. Why? Because M$ is a monopoly and everyone knows it. I want to be a Linux fan but there is no Linux company that will get off their ass and make a version where I don't have to compile shit. The end user should not have to recompile the kernel. Linux has a great future but that is the FUTURE. AMD needs an OS NOW. Since linux can't do it who else will? M$. Businesses are here to make money and to stay afloat AMD went ahead an sold their souls. Would you have it that Intel was the only processor company out there? I certainly wouldn't.

Re:OOO flamebait! I'll respond!

[13Echo]

"I want to be a Linux fan but there is no Linux company that will get off their ass and make a version where I don't have to compile shit."

OK, goofball. I actually hope you don't want to be a Linux fan, because you obviously don't know what in the hell you are talking about...

You can't make Linux cross-platform/multi-distribution and not have to compile programs. Every Linux distribution is a little bit different. They all rely on shared libraries for things to get done. If you download a Gnome app, it requires GTK. KDE apps require QT. Other apps have similar needs. You *can* include the libraries with Linux applications, and you won't need to compile the program for architecture or file locations, but that defeats one of Linux's main benefits.

Besides... You must be really damn lazy if you can't type 3 simple commands to compile a program.

Got a better solution? Write your own OS. I personally like compiling my programs. It is simple, and gives me complete control over the finished/installed app. Plus, I know that I can run it on any architecture that I could ever wish to use, with some minor tweaks.

What you are basically asking for is for everyone to support only *one* Linux distribution. Gee... Where does that leave us? With another Microsoft-esque solution? (Insert obligatory Red Hat/Suse/Connectiva/SCO/TurboLinux/UnitedLinux flame here)

Re:Damnit -- should of used the preview button

[civilizedINTENSITY]

But he says AMD believes that these technologies should be "opt-in" - that the user should control it - not government mandates.

Hollywood and the music industry are lobbying hard to make DRM mandatory in all new devices, and existing laws here and in the US make it a crime to switch it off.

Re:*sigh*

[IRNI]

sure. it is called powerpc. :)

So...

[labratuk]

Is this something from which we cannot Opt-er-out?

I'll get my coat.

Re:So...

[Telex4]

You can if you're Intel-ligent.

ah-hmm.

That doesn't even make sense in the context!

Article is old and incorrect

[l33t-gu3lph1t3]

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=5489

"Comments that looked like they were from Pat Moorhead on an Aussie Web site are not from Pat Moorhead, the firm has just told us.
In fact, according to an AMD UK representative, AMD's Opteron products will run any kind of content in the future -- contrary to the report in The Age, on which our original report, below, was based.

Part of the content in The Age failed to distinguish between comments Moorhead made and conjecture, AMD said.

AMD, in fact, claims it is the "good guy", and even though it is a member of the "trusted computing" initiative, will allow users to opt in whether to use this type of technology or not.

"There is nothing [in Hammer] that could actually prevent a user running unlicensed content," the representative from AMD said."

Make damn sure to check the most current of facts before posting FUD, fellow /.ers?

Ya know...

[Jhon]

Maybe... just MAYBE 1.8 Ghz with win98 or linux or whathaveyou is fast enough. I STILL use my old p166 for the majority of my "work" related activities (email, word processing, etc), I doubt I'm going to find an app any time soon that wont run well on my 1.8 Ghz monster. Bet my p166 is still chugging along 5 years down the road, too.

-jhon

Re:Ya know...

[RAMMS EIN]

Keyword here is ``work''. Ever come up with the idea that most of your lovely Windows users use their systems to play games? Besides, as far as I can see DRM will mostly go against closed source software and multimedia. I seem to recall from a previous /. discussion (sorry, I'm in a hurry, can't look it up now) that there would be a special DRM-mode that the CPU could run in, which would be the necessary requirement for using Palladium-enabled content. Old-style software and the likes should still be able to run in non-DRM mode. And I am sure that there will always be manufacturers that didn't participate in Palladium. As long as I can run open source software, I don't care what other users do to themselves.

This is just silly

[Rui del-Negro]

Do you think the CPU has any idea if it's rendering a 3D scene or playing an MP3 or decompressing a JPEG or spell-checking a document? Let alone know if the files are copyrighted or not.

That's up to the OS and individual applications to (try to) determine and enforce.

The only thing that changes in a "secure" CPU is the fact that programs and (especially) the operating system will be able to identify that CPU uniquely (by a serial number), similar to what the Pentium III already does (but you can turn it off on the PIII, and I think also on the P4). Then some programs will probably refuse to play certain files if they're not tagged with that CPU id. Ex., if you buy a "secure" song on-line, or if you rip one of your CD's, it probably won't play on your friend's computer (or on yours if you change the CPU, and that's why MS needs to work with CPU makers, to make sure the CPU id can be managed by the OS).

The rest is just a lot of marketing hype to get money out of the RIAA and similar associations. "See, we are working on this 'secure' hardware that won't play copyrighted music, but it's very expensive to develop and we really don't have enough money, what with this recession and everything, so if you could fork over a couple of million, we'd appreciate it..."

It's a potential gold mine for (some) IT companies, just like the Y2K bug.

RMN
~~~

Other options

[cleetus]

Stick with what you got. Who needs another Ghz of CPU? Aside from gamers, who have my sympathy, most other users out there don't come close to really needing all the power currently in their CPUs. So just don't buy it. You won't feel the difference.

cleetus

Re:Other options

[Nogami_Saeko]

Yup, CPU / MB manufacturers better beware - my system is already really damn fast (tm). If they start getting on the bandwagon of restricting what MY computer can do, they'll find MY hard-earned money going into huge LCD displays, video cards, or simply other areas of interest besides computing.

Which all means I won't be buying THEIR motherboards or CPUs.

Re:Other options

[be-fan]

Why do statements like this pop up all the time? What exactly do you do with your computer, and why do you assume that "most other users" do the same. There are legions of people trying to do C++/Java development that can't wait for hardware that will make templated code in G++ quick to compile and make the java-vm start up quickly enough for 'ls' type programs. Then there are the people doing DTP who want more resolution, the people playing games that need more FPS, the people doing rendering that need more raytracing capacity, etc ad nauseum.

Re:Well I guess we can't win

[Sivar]

With any Palladium system, you will be able to disable Palladium in BIOS, so it _doesn't matter_ if a system supports it or not. If you turn it off, you will be unable to use Palladium protected media, just like pre-Palladium systems.
If you turn it on, you will at least have the option--an option I plan not to exercize.

Not all documents are locked documents

[yerricde]

Hollywood and the music industry are lobbying hard to make DRM mandatory in all new devices

Once the TCPA system becomes more widespread, Hollywood will have less room to bitch because there will be a Secure Memory Space(tm)(patent) in the most popular consumer operating system, and Hollywood studios will be able to provide Video On Demand services within that space.

and existing laws here and in the US make it a crime to switch it off.

Not exactly. The Palladium and TCPA systems simply provide a way to lock down data such that only specific applications running on one machine can use it. In order for Palladium or TCPA to actually restrict anything, the content provider must make the choice to lock down the data (conforming Compact Discs are not considered locked down). This doesn't give the RIAA labels an absolute oligopoly, as it's still possible for artists to Not Lock Down(tm) their .ogg files.

The public TCPA information stresses that only TCPA apps will use the TCPA memory space. Microsoft's Palladium materials make the same claim. And you'll apparently be able to turn off the systems in the BIOS setup, which will have only one effect: apps that use those systems will throw up an alert box to the effect "The locked document 'Love Me Now.wma' could not be opened because Palladium was not found." They do NOT force all documents to be locked documents.

I wonder ?

[Raiford]

How does a vendor checking your machine remotely, finding unlicensed content and deleting said content fit into current laws governing search and seizure practices ? Just curious ?

Re:I wonder ?

[rosewood]

If they (MS) put it in the EULA that they can do this (which fuck, they already have) then you are pretty much fucked.

Re:Not really a law issue.

[einer]

Has Transmeta been forgotten?

Re:uhh.....

[Kythorn]

From the same FAQ you link to:

Q: Can Linux, FreeBSD or another open source OS run on "Palladium" hardware?

A: Virtually anything that runs on a Windows-based machine today will still run on a "Palladium" machine (there are some esoteric exceptions[1]). If you currently have a machine that runs both Linux and Windows, you would be able to have that same functionality on a "Palladium" machine.

[1] These exceptions include the following:

Some debuggers may need to be updated to work in the "Palladium" environment, but they can still work.
Some special performance tools may need to be updated.
Software that writes directly to TCPA hardware will need to be updated.
Memory scrub routines (at the hardware level) will need attention.
Third-party crash dump software may need to be updated.
BIOS mode hibernation features will need to be updated to work with "Palladium."

You're kidding, right?

[Noose For A Neck]

Palladium means that anyone who wants to be able to view Palladium-protected media will have to have Palladium-compliant hardware. It's a goddamn goldmine for Intel and AMD! Imagine all the people who wouldn't otherwise bother to upgrade buying new chips so they can watch their DVD movies or whatever. That's a large amount of sales.

Re:You're kidding, right?

[Featureless]

A risky business. If customers become unhappy with "trusted computing," perhaps because it's main "feature" is restricing their activities or violating their privacy (and believe me, palladium will do both), they may reject the new hardware.

"Intellectual property politics" may be too complicated and confusing for most people to understand, but when it's sitting on their desktop, they will figure it out quick.

Customers (especially home users) may resist buying the new equipment, which both Intel and AMD are in a poor position to afford. Apple (which has, by the way, put a large amount of effort into promoting open media - rip/mix/burn, ipod, etc) might not play ball with trusted computing, and reap huge rewards in new marketshare. Finally, free operating systems, especially Linux, might be catalyzed by the vast new community of people looking to take advantage of the next generation hardware without the restrictions of "Trusted" Windows (talk about an oxymoron).

Finally, lest we forget, palladium security will be broken, perhaps even before it is released. DRM is only a cage. Things only need to escape once.

Palladium is a giant loser, except possibly for Microsoft, who will use it to invoke the DMCA against open source authors who attempt to interoperate with their "secure" system. Against that, we can only hope the anti-trust judge is up enough on the issues to head off the issue with meaningful requirements (and enforcement) of an interoperability policy.

Re:You're kidding, right?

[joshki]

You're forgetting that MS has a major hold over Apple. Without Office for OSX, Apple goes back to being a niche pc with a niche os that will only get used by graphic designers -- and they'll have a wintel box on their desk right along with the mac so they can get "real work" done. Until OO or somebody has an office suite available that's 100% compatible with MS's file formats, hang it up -- Apple will fall right into line. In fact, I'm surprised they haven't said anything about it yet.

Re:You're kidding, right?

[Dr. Spork]

I don't see the risk to chip manufacturers. I do see a potential risk to Windows market share, because this will piss people off. If the really invasive incarnations of this conincide with the release of a very solid WINE embedded in a nice Linux distribution, it will make very little sense to keep buying Microsoft operating systems.

Re:You're kidding, right?

[TheGratefulNet]

what about sun hardware? ibm? sgi? etc.

are you saying that sun will also have to implement this? somehow, I doubt it. I can't believe IMPORTANT content will be allowed only to wintel cartel members..

Re:You're kidding, right?

[Anonymous Coward]

It would be even better. There will be
Palladium 1.0, Palladium 2.0, Palladium 3.0.
And for each new geneeration you will have
to buy a new CPU!!! Finally there will
be a way to force customer to buy
new CPU even if the user does not need more
speed - just because the newer soft will require
newer protection!

Also finally both soft and CPUs will be leased
to consumers! No need to develop any more people
will simply pay year to year for both software
and hardware!

What a dream for vendors!

Kubus

Re:You're kidding, right?

[zephc]

Hey I resent that remark! I do no graphic design stuff in OS X, rather I do all my development in it. I get "real work" done on my Mac, and I play games on PCs.

As far as file formats and such, I'm surprised the guys at Gobe Software haven't tried to port their Productive suite over to OS X. then again, maybe they are....

Also, OS X 10.2 comes with AppleWorks on the second CD, but I don;t know how up to snuff they are with handling the latest .DOC format and .PPT and so on.

Re:You're kidding, right?

[jbolden]

Or the combination of Sun, Linux and Mac break the universality of .doc format. Going to war is very dangerous, I think Microsoft realizes this.

Re:You're kidding, right?

[joshki]

Oh I wish...

That would be a great day for the world...

I love Office XP -- it's really a wonderful program -- but if you can't afford it (I can't -- I use it at school), there has to be a way to interoperate with it. I think what they've done with their file formats is more anti-competetive than anything relating to browser-bundling.

Re:You're kidding, right?

[jbolden]

First off I'm not an AC take a look. I also agree about file formats. I've long been of the opinion that a good settlement would be:

a) Prohibit Microsoft from offering company specific pricing. They have to use some sort of flat pricing scheme though they can charge more for retail than OEM...

b) Publishing the file formats they use for their products.

Those two would be enough IMHO.

Re:You're kidding, right?

[joshki]

that's just my sig -- I got tired of people posting mindless drivel in reply to my comments, and not having the guts to put their names on them. Has nothing to do with you... :)

a) agreed

b) agreed -- publish, free of any licensing restrictions. Or under the GPL, or something like it.

And finally -- remove the clause from their OEM agreements that prohibits OEMs from selling machines without windows on them.

I think those three things would eliminate MS as a monopoly -- I think Office would continue to sell just fine, but they would have to reduce the price. I think it's a pretty well-accepted fact that their pricing structure is hideous. They sell to students and colleges for around 100 bucks a license, but stick it to home users and businesses for 550+??? I wouldn't object to paying maybe 150 for Office -- but I won't pay 550 for the whole suite for my home use.

Re:You're kidding, right?

[jbolden]

Yes one of the things I invision is that they can't require OEMs to have a Microsoft only position (that's the point of all companies equal). I do think its fair though that when OEMs do install MSOffice they have to do it under Microsoft's rules (i.e. no branding on the OEM versions or at least that they much include a non branded version of the OS on CD/DVD).

Re:You're kidding, right?

[Featureless]

No way, jose. That was my final point about Palladium. Wine will never support it. There won't even be an "NTFS2" filesystem module. If Microsoft does it "right," any attempt to interoperate with Palladium in a meaningful way will have to involve reverse-engineering their system to "beat" the security architecture, much like we had to reverse-engineer and break CSS in order to play DVDs. I bet they'll even find a way to cook up a new "secure" network protocol to squish SAMBA. All of these technologies are designed to keep us (or any competitor) out as much as to keep the content in.

Look what happened to the DVD people. Yes, DeCSS is out there, but many of the kids who wrote it are fighting for their lives in court even as we speak. Microsoft is at least as ruthless as the MPAA and several orders of magnitude richer. They figure it's long past time they got some of these extravagant protections too.

The risk to Intel and AMD is very real. Sales are already very soft. Moore's law may still be hanging on, but returns are diminishing. Consoles are sucking up the home PC market. Fewer and fewer people are deciding to "buy the next version" with each new generation, and that was before the economy got Enroned. More expensive, less and less distinguishable from the current fare, and with the added danger of new restrictions and surveillance... and Sony and Apple poised to snap up your fleeing customers...

You could see a real bloodbath.

Re:You're kidding, right?

[Featureless]

You may be right - Apple has rolled over before. It will be interesting to see what they do. The reason I wonder about it is that they've been so... proactive about music sharing and even "video tools" over the past year or two. And they have so much to gain.

For Microsoft's part, there's that terribly inconvenient antitrust lawsuit. It would perhaps be a bit much, even for Bill, to cut off Apple before it's resolved. And despite the best efforts of the Bush administration, there's still a a chance it won't get resolved. Depends on how the elections go this fall, and most of all on the judge. CKK has been up to some interesting things lately...

Then there's Sun. Sun knows how important Office is to Microsoft. That's why they're pouring $$$'s into their own office suite. Have you seen it lately? It gets closer to MS Office (in features and compatibility) with each passsing month. It's an uphill technical battle, but not unwinnable.

I'm not saying it's a sure thing. But you have to admit. If you're Steve Jobs... it's got potential.

Re:Hopefully ...

[homer_ca]

For forced DRM to work, all the hardware must support it and be locked down to prevent tampering. If the rest of the world says no to Palladium/TCPA, the Taiwanese motherboard makers will still make unrestricted motherboards for all the non-US markets. It could be as easy as a BIOS flash with a Euro or Asian ROM.

Re:Oh great

[13Echo]

I'm hoping for something as simple to disable as the old PIII processor serial numbers.

Really though, I doubt that this will have any real impact on non-Windows software just yet.

Personally, I hope that it stops piracy, so that people will stop pirating Windows programs and use GNU/GPL software instead. Windows wouldn't nearly be as big if people were forced to stop pirating software. Hardly any Windows users that I know actually pay for their stuff. It's kinda ironic, isn't it? I use Linux, yet support my favorite Linux software companies better than most Windows users.

Opt-out, open source and the rest of the world

[lanalyst]

Ok, so the US gets all this restrictive legislation passed - the cabal has their way and implements hardware DRM to enforce it while the rest of the world has a good belly laugh. The arrogance to think that there won't be alternative hardware available from Asia - or anywhere else for that matter - is stupifying.

The emerging markets for new technology is not the US but the parts of the world that don't have it now. If MS, Intel, etc are only selling locked down software on 4GHZ chips, why wouldn't a consumer in say China choose Linux/BSD/etc on a say a VIA processor and chipset that doesn't implement DRM?

This is all such a waste... and economic suicide for US technology companies. To think they can impose their self interests outside their borders - after they thumb their nose at organizations such as the world court - is inexplicable.

This nonsense can't be enforced and in the end the 'bootleg' companies will win.

Prohabition, speakeasys and organized crime - funny how history repeats itself.

Re:Opt-out, open source and the rest of the world

[RAMMS EIN]

Well, it certainly seems that the USA have been doing just that on several occasions, and they're still the #1 world power. Unfortunately, being unreasonable and arrogant sometimes just works.

Re:Opt out

[jsse]

Boom. That's the end of legal free (and Free) software in the USA

and only in USA.

Unless US Government would pass export laws that forbidden export of non-DRM electronics, like they did to cryptos.

This is unlikely to happen, but in view of its track records...hmm...

Re:Story is Incorrect (perhaps)-"opt-in"

[Green Light]

Some thing may indeed be switchable, but companies that want to excercise their "IP" could simple make it a "you want what we have, then you have to turn it on". Negating the difference between "opt-in" and "opt-out".

Uh, yeah, and your point is? Someone who owns the content can rightly choose to require DRM-ish stuff to be enabled in order to "consume" their content. If you don't like that, then you don't have to "consume" it. You are free to choose what you want to enable, they are free to distribute as they want to, everybody's happy 8^)

Re:Well I guess we can't win

[Com2Kid]

If you turn it off, you will be unable to use Palladium protected media,

For some reason I have the strong suspicion that most pirated videos or MP3s will NOT be Palladium protected. . . .

Call it a huntch. :-D

Re:The virtual machine approach will help

[iamacat]

How will it prevent virtual machine from interacting with virtual hardware that doesn't happen to enforce any restrictions?

Re:Well I guess we can't win

[Powercntrl]

With any Palladium system, you will be able to disable Palladium in BIOS, so it _doesn't matter_ if a system supports it or not. If you turn it off, you will be unable to use Palladium protected media, just like pre-Palladium systems.

...and with any DIVX enabled player, you could just watch DVDs and never touch a DIVX disc, right? That is of course until DIVX "enhanced" players have a majority share in the market - then DVDs would have disappeared. Likewise, when most PCs support palladium, it will start becoming mandatory. Want to play that new FPS game online? It needs to run in a trusted enviorment to make sure you're not cheating. Want to run the latest version of MS Office because MS changed the document format yet again and you need to open documents from work? MS Office now requires Palladium support enabled to run. If you're presently not using a MS OS, it may be easy to overlook the significance of Palladium. Just remember, if you don't speak out for the Windows users because you're not a Windows user, just wait 'till big brother comes for you because "only hackers/terrorists/child pornographers use non-palladium hardware/software".

What I would like to know is ...

[adipocere]

will old hardware and software combinations (say a PIII running Windows 2000) be able to view/listen to/use the new DRM'd stuff? Or is whatever the DRM bit of media is encrypted in something you need DRM-compliant hardware/software to open?

I may end up buying a LOT of P4s in a big, big hurry.

Re:What I would like to know is ...

[Zenki]

Geez. How can it be built in if Palladium hasn't been even defined yet. Some people call it DRM, some people call it some sort of virtual machine protection. Ditto if it's the first, but if it turns out to be the second, I'll be more than happy for it.

Two-thirds of the studios run free software

[yerricde]

Law 3) Require DRM hardware to ONLY run DRM-compliant software (not too hard to imagine).

Neither TCPA nor Palladium does this.

That's the end of legal free (and Free) software in the USA.

The federal government uses Free software. The news media use Free software (largely in BSD and Linux based web servers). Heck, two-thirds of the Big Nine media publishers (MPAA studios and RIAA labels), such as AOL Time Warner, Sony, BMG, Fox, Paramount, and Universal, run free web server software such as Apache or AOLserver on their web sites. (Disney and EMI run IIS, and MGM runs Netscape Enterprise Server.)

Re:Two-thirds of the studios run free software

[Grishnakh]

Yeah, but the hogs at the very top don't know what software their corporate webservers run, and probably don't care either. They probably think that IIS is just as good, but due to the size of their organization, the IT person in charge has picked something better. You don't think Jack Valenti knows what webserver software the MPAA's running, do you?

Strange?

[Sj0]

I didn't know what to think of palladium, but then I realized two things; this might make the MPAA less squeamish about releasing content specifically for computers, and I mostly make my own content anyway, or download it from other small, independant sources.

The only thing which this could cause problems with would be if I downloaded movies and MP3s off of kazaa, but since I have a 56k connection, I don't bother.
I can't blame the evil powers that be for trying *something* to protect their interests, and to be honest, I'd rather have it so I need the new kickass AMD processor than have it so the MPAA and RIAA can DoS everyone they please or suing the creators of a GPL'd DVD Player.

So who wants to do something about the latter measures?

Let 'em know ...

[rlp]

Don't like Palladium - write to Intel and AMD and tell them
that you won't buy processors that support Palladium.
Intel backed-off CPU-ID's (for the Pentium III) quickly when
they realized that it would cost them sales. In general,
pissing off your best customers is not a smart long term
business practice.

If you write - remember: be concise and polite:

Intel:

Chairman: Andy S. Grove
CEO: Craig R. Barrett

Corporate Offices:
2200 Mission College Blvd.
Santa Clara, California 95052, USA

AMD:
Chairman: W. J. Sanders III
CEO: Hector de J. Ruiz

Corporate Offices:
One AMD Place
P.O. Box 3453
Sunnyvale CA 94088, USA

This may be different but

[Chanc_Gorkon]

AIX supports something they call the Trusted Computing Base and it has to be chosen to be installed at install time. I basically has alot of things to make sure things stay as secure as possible. If this is anything like that, then I don't see how or why Palladium needs to be implemented in hardware. AIX does not have anything specific in the hardware to support TCB. It's a modified Kernel. I did not say that they don't have serials out the wazoo. They do. But noone is concerned about TCB on AIX. Even if it isn't the same, I see some of the same features in Palladium as the TCB has on AIX. Basically, I would like to see hardware and software first before I come out against it. It may be we are all just freking out about nothing. If it does come out, well, my computers fast enough now and does everything I need to do except for a vew things, and plenty of non palladium machines are out already. Just use the old stuff until they realize it won't sell. Passport flopped because noone wants it. Palladium could fail just the same. All I would like to see/fight against is the REQUIREMENT that this stuff be run.

Re:This may be different but

[Chanc_Gorkon]

You should have been able to do this....no idea why you could not. After editing the file, you should have ran tcbck -t. That goes through and checks the tcb. It prompts you what to do when it hits the file. There's also a grpchk one too. Also, you should have had a mksysb handy too..you didn't? Whups.

Re:I don't get it

[Beliskner]

At first it'll be legal, we'll get used to it same as we got used to Dick Cheney. Then one day, boom it'll all stop working. Prohibition didn't happen overnight, the media was instructed by the Government to teach everyone that alcohol was evil, then after a few years when public opinion fell in line, they hit the US with prohibition. This is just the start of DRM.

Re:Not really a law issue.

[Hoser McMoose]

Yes, and for good reason.

Transmeta had something interesting in their code morphing software, but they didn't make use of it. Instead all they ever managed to produced is a butt-slow x86 processor that used an ass-backwards way of getting x86 compatability.

Their only saving grace was that, for a while, they had lower powered chips then the other companies out there, however even that has been eliminated with the ULV PIIIs and the VIA C3 chips. Once Intel's Banias chip is available, that'll be the final stake in Transmeta's coffin if someone hasn't bought them up by that time.

Ohh, and yes, I am aware that I have been speaking of Transmeta in the past-tense. They're a dead company. They'll probably be bought out by someone who has some potential uses for their code morphing software. My guess is IBM, but there are other possibilities.

Re: It *was* somewhat insightful.... that's why!

[King_TJ]

How many 8088 processors are still running? How many 80286's? Every time I find somebody's old IBM XT or AT collecting dust in a closet, it turns out the thing still powers up/boots just fine.

The point is, the expected lifetime of a modern CPU should be plenty long enough to outlast the next couple generations of new chips. If you need more processor power and refuse to move to the newer generation of CPU, you could very well add more of the older systems to a cluster instead. By the time they all reached their "end of life" - you'd probably be at the point where things changed so dramatically, DRM was the least of your concerns.

Nope

[0x0d0a]

That's complete nonsense.

I disagree. He stated that Palladium can be disabled. It's a technical fact, and it also happens to be correct. Not nonsense.

Like playing Quake 3, or Counter-Strike? Better enjoy them while you can...soon you won't be able to play them without palladium enabled.

a) Learn about Quake. Quake's insane success was mostly because of massive online acceptance which was mostly due to piracy. This increased the value of the game, and sold more copies. id admitted as much. Quake is without a doubt the single *worst* example you could have chosen of a piece of software having incentive to have strong DRM. Almost any other piece of software would be a more valid argument.

b) This is tough for Windows warez-playing gamers. I have a tough time feeling sorry for them. It'll never affect Linux -- to do Palladium, you'd need universal blessed, signed binaries of the kernel. That will happen when hell freezes over, because Linus can't even stand distribution of binary code, much less universalized binary code.

Re:Nope

[squiggleslash]

Quake's insane success was mostly because of massive online acceptance which was mostly due to piracy.

You know, I remember a time it was pretty close to impossible to find anyone who had a legal copy of Windows. Everyone had Win3.1 on their machines, usually pilfered from an already under-licensed place of employment.

Microsoft however, despite riding the wave of success that ubiquitousness brought it, didn't decide to make Windows shareware. It came up with a variety of methods to prevent the above from going on, culminating in WPA and, er, Palladium.

b) This is tough for Windows warez-playing gamers.

Well, hang on. It'll effect Windows gamers, period. It'll negatively effect warez players, but the majority of Windows gamers out there, which is pretty much the majority of non-professional PC users, will have to enable Palladium to get their precious software to run.

It's hard enough to persuade people to look at alternatives to Windows right now. To be told "Oh it's ok, to dual boot all you have to do is turn Palladium on and off in the BIOS, it's right next to the big scary menu involving IRQs and DMA channels, then when you've saved your settings you can choose the OS you want to boot into..." ... well, it's not going to fly really. They will not dual boot, and so they will not use Linux, OpenBeOS, Atheos, Plan 9, Coherent, QDOS, TripOS, PICK, UCSD p-System, Xenix, or any other alternative operating system out there.

I'll get my coat.

Re:Nope

[0x0d0a]

I'd have to read the spec again to be sure, but I don't believe that you need to disable TCPA (TCPA is the hardware bit -- Palladium is just the software support in Windows, and has also been (unfortunately) used to refer to the system as a whole) to use a non-TCPA OS. You just won't have the ability to use TCPA to get access to some data -- TCPA is effectively "not enabled" unless both the BIOS has it enabled and the OS is trying to use it.

Re:Nope

[drinkypoo]

It'll never affect Linux -- to do Palladium, you'd need universal blessed, signed binaries of the kernel. That will happen when hell freezes over, because Linus can't even stand distribution of binary code, much less universalized binary code.

Since the code is GPL there is nothing stopping someone else from rolling a palladium-approved linux kernel. Of course, it would still have to be open source, but obviously the palladium instruction set will be relatively open, and how to interface to it will be a matter of record, so I don't see how that's a stumbling block.

So you'll have the source but it won't do you any good, or at least not as much good as it's been known to do. You won't be able to build from source and create your own palladium-enabled kernel but you'll be able to build from source, fix bugs, and submit patches. So if there turns out to be a market for a Palladium-enabled Linux, it will come.

As to whether there is a market for that or not, I have no idea.

Re:Nope

[pr0nboy]

Actually that is not correct. Palladium is not just the software implementation of the TCPA spec. Both TCPA and Palladium refer to trusted systems that require both hardware and software support, but they are distinct systems. The biggest difference is in the boot process- TCPA takes over at start up and will only go into trusted mode if the OS is signed and verified. Palladium is not involved in the boot process at all- it is enabled later and essentially runs parallel to the OS kernel to secure the memory and resources of an application. This wasn't clear until recently, so a lot of people have this misconception.

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default. asp?url=/technet/security/news/PallFAQ2.asp
http://vitanuova.loyalty.org/2002-07-05.html

Re:Nope

[kasperd]

download this kernel to play $GAME!

What did I miss? The kernel runs in kernel space, the game runs in user space. How can the game tell the difference between a signed and an unsigned kernel?

Re:Nope

[squiggleslash]

Speak for yourself. I'm quite sure people are capable of doing it, but I doubt anyone wants to do it.

If I had to fuck with the BIOS every time I rebooted, I wouldn't do it. There's a reason why I used Linux or Windows to set the system clock, for instance.

Yeah, a CEO can do it. I see no reason why they would, can you?

Re:Nope

[drinkypoo]

I don't know if a loadable module would quite cover it. I guess if you had an open source palladium driver in the kernel (or loaded all the time anyway) which required loading the external module to unlock palladium-protected content.

They say that they will only use palladium to protect media and not software but like the rest of you I see it as only being a matter of time, so we'll soon need to be able to load palladium before we're even finished booting. I guess a scheme like this would allow a closed implementation of palladium to work on an open source free-as-in-speech operating system without violating anyone's rights or licensing agreements.

Of course, the rights alloted you change from week to week around here...

Transmeta

[Midnight Thunder]

Looks like Crusoe could be a nice alternative if you still want to keep on using the x86 instruction set and avoid Palladium. Otherwise, its time that maybe you asked yourself how much your freedom is worth and switched to the Mac.

The free market *will* live

[0x0d0a]

These TCPA companies are so concerned with the wants and needs of consumer. Long live the free fucking market.

It does live on.

Suppose someone comes up with truly unstoppable, unbreakable DRM. (It sure as hell isn't TCPA unless the deadline gets pushed way the hell back. Hardware manufacturers are *not* used to, and many engineers are not inclined to lose sleep over implementing TCPA securely.) Then it just means that consumers have to pay for a given product. If a product costs too much...then guess what? No one busy it, the company goes out of business. Goods priced at zero will still have a benefit, and if that's really what the consumer wants, it'll be what the consumer ends up getting.

Riiiight

[0x0d0a]

...Apple will have to make a competing implementation, or else you'll find your precious lickable G4 unable to run an increasing number of things.

After all the time Apple's spent doing their own thing despite exactly this being true -- massive compatibility issues with the rest of the PC market -- you honestly think that TCPA will drive them back into the flock of sheep? Give me a break.

Read the content...AMD == Intel

[0x0d0a]

AMD and Intel are both doing exactly the same thing -- letting TCPA (and hence Palladium) be BIOS-disableable. It's a required part of the TCPA spec.

This is not news. Both AMD and Intel are supporting TCPA, both let you disable it.

Re:Read the content...AMD == Intel

[bwt]

The progression goes like this:
1) Some hardware will allow opt-in
2) All hardware will allow opt-in
3) Some hardware will allow opt-out
4) All hardware will allow opt-out
5) Some hardware won't allow opt-out
6) All hardware won't allow opt-out

We must fight this at every step of the progression. We must associate some kind of opportunity cost with moving down the progression. Right now moving from 5 to 6 kills open source, so people better start getting serious and getting mean about making end users who slide down the slippery slope understand that there are downsides.

Re:Well I guess we can't win

[Dr. Spork]

I hope that by the time Palladium is required for everything, WINE will be able to emulate all the Windows functions I currently need.

In a way, it really gives you a reason to dump Windows and invest in an alternative. If the scenario is headed for the bleakness you expect, DRM restrictions are going to cripple Windows usability to such a degree that it will become a rock attached to Microsoft's ankle. I would actually like to see this. It won't happen, though, because Microsoft, whether through incompetence or brilliant design, will make sure that its DRM protections are always hackable just enough to keep warez dudes from switching away.

Sparc or similar

[unsinged int]

With Sun becoming interested in Linux, it might be possible that when Intel and AMD ship these DRM-chips, they get some kind of new Sparc or something shipped without DRM. (Obviously the old ones are DRM-free, but for sake of having something closer the speed of Intel/AMD they'll need a new one...) Then they can build a low-cost system around it (no fancy memory) and make it available to non-corporate types.

Then all the Windows people are locked onto Intel/AMD, but Linux/Unix users with source code won't have a problem compiling for a Sparc (or whatever).

no shit einstein.

[7-Vodka]

That's how palladium will work AT FIRST. All the palladium hardware will be able to run in insecure mode.

Regect corporate content!

[Redline]

Is everyone really upset because your new Disney DVD is going to require Windows 2005 and a Palladium CPU to play? Instead of bitching about how you should be able to play/copy your new NSync CD anywhere you want, maybe people need to stop feeding the corporate beast that spawns this crap.
Support garage bands. See local shows with local talent. See an indie film at your local arthouse or the MFA. By a PowerPC, Alpha, or Sparc. Download a free or opensource MMORPG/RTS/MUD on the internet and spend a few hours making friends with humans all over the world, and in the process create your own DRM-free content!
I know this is slashdot, and we only care about freedom/justice/rights until Blizzard puts out a new game, Disney imports some anime, or George Lucas belches, but come on. There is so much good content available out there. You don't *have* to buy/rent your entertainment from Viacom. If you don't buy DRM enabled content, you don't have to worry about owning a DRM enabled machine. I am sure I will always have a unixy (Linux/BSD/whatever) box on which to run my indie content.
Of course, you can just ignore this message, and go back to downloading your Divx rip of AOTC on kazaa while bitching that your "rights" are being trampled.

still not clear then.

[7-Vodka]

AMD's Opteron won't reject unlicensed content - Ron Goldin - Fri, Sep 20, 2002 - 10:46 AM

Ok, so it sounds like it STILL HAS PALLADIUM in it. This is how palladium hardware works, it can also run unsecured content, but not in secure mode.

WISE the fuck up folks. This is how palladium is designed to work at first. IT'S OPTIONAL. That's how they want to fuck us over, by getting most people without them even knowing.

Please WAKE UP people.

[7-Vodka]

AMD must have recieved a lot of flack for that interview. This is why they're trying to SPIN the issue.

There is no fucking way someone who works at AMD says by accident that they're including palladium. They either are or they're not and theres no internal confusion. It's a BFD.

The opteron still has palladium. Don't be fooled by comments carefully crafted to confuse you into thinking there's no palladium. When they say "it will still run unsecured content." They are just playing off the fact that palladium hardware allows you to run unsecured content when it runs in usecured mode.

Don't fool yourselves, most windows lusers will be running longhorn with secure mode on. That's how it all starts.

If you like your fair use rights, free software, competition in the software market, low prices, commodity computing... Get ready to bend over and be thoroughly pounded by the big devil in redmond for the rest of your breathing existance.

Maybe it's time for PC architecture to die

[javacowboy]

Many computer technicians have long complained about how flawed and completely inefficient the PC-Intel architecture is, and how alternative platforms like Apple and Sparc are so much better.

The only thing that the PC has going for it is that it's cheap, open, and completely commoditized.

After Palladium, I doubt very much that PCs will be continue to drop in price, and they definitely won't be open.

I'm willing to bet significant amounts of users will switch to alternative platforms, including, I imagine, the entire open-source community and many nations outside the US.

Intel and AMD have shot themselves in the foot, as well as all other hardware vendors who depend on making parts for PC's.

Re:Buy a sparc

[TheLastUser]

I love Sun gear too, but I don't know if a single cpu sparc platform makes much sense. I don't know if Sun gear gives the same bang for the buck on a single (or even dual) cpu machine. On a 4+ cpu machine, maybe... I guess the quality of the HW has to count for something, and Sun service has always been excellent, in my experience.

Also, I think the Solaris kernel is really good, better than Linux IMHO, except for the hardware driver availability, which doesn't matter for a sparc box. On the oher hand the rest of the OS takes serious amounts of work before it is usable for anything. RedHat, for instance, is much more complete. Sun should really spend some time integrating the OSS tools, which are far better than the propritary SVR5 sh-t that they are shipping. Why do they ship vi instead of vim? Why Why Why?

They should just download a version of RedHat and use that as a guide of what to include in a modern lunix distro.

One thing that Solaris has that I miss on Linux is a good auditd, but...

Re:Well I guess we can't win

[balloonhead]

Surely all that'll happen is that the *nix users and anyone else who cares will just run open-source or pre-DRM software on pre-DRM / DRM-disabled hardware. As long as the internet doesn't have fundamental DRM enabled (I find this hard to believe at any point in the future) then people can go on as before.

This will lead to some restrictions in that you might not be able to run new software, but then you can just go and run the DRM-cracked copies that will take hours to surface. At this stage the ideology of DRM will be valid as the only people not using it are those running warez.

I think that the worries are more potential than real - if DRM is invasively implemented there will be a backlash; it's doubtful it could stand up in court (just show a Linux user running legal software with DRM disabled as a display of the stupidity of it all).

Re:Well I guess we can't win

[Alsee]

With any Palladium system, you will be able to disable Palladium

Yeah, but I still don't appreciate being forced to pay for it next time I get a faster CPU.

<sarcasm>
Or maybe they will offer a cheaper line of CPU's that don't include Palladium.
</sarcasm>

For what it's worth, if either Intel or AMD offers the cheaper non-Palladium chip they've got my bussiness.

-

Re:Bull

[symbolic]

What's Microsoft going to do if both Intel and AMD tell Billy-boy to take his Palladium and shove it up his .NET? Seriously- what other chip manufacturers are there to fill in the gap? Here's a clue: None. So, either you have two absolutely spineless companies whose ONLY concern is avoiding Billy's wrath, or two companies with a bit of virtue that can not only recognize true nastiness when they see it, but work in a common direction to put it to rest. The fact that neither of them are willing to step up to the plate is bad news.

Now the battle is in the court of consumer acceptance. As [insert favorite deity here] is my witness, I will NOT buy ANYTHING that has anything to do with Palladium. Let's see how many others have the same resolve. Seeing what a crack habit the entertainment industry has become, though, I think I already know.

Re:Well I guess we can't win

[0x0d0a]

just wait 'til big brother comes for you because "only hackers/terrorists/child pornographers use non-palladium hardware/software".

Just a smidgen of slippery slope here, perhaps?

Possible reason for the delay?

[RelliK]

Does anyone else think that the previously reported delay in ClawHammer production is due to this crap?

Hostile Takeover?

[Greyfox]

Well SUNW is trading at less than $3 a share. Lets all kick in a few hundred bucks and stage a hostile takeover...

NO IT WON'T ... /. PROMOTES FUD, NEWS AT 11.00!!!

[JoeGee]

Doesn't anyone at /. bother to check sources, or even look for more current versions of articles anymore?

Breathe in. Breathe out. Repeat. Read this updated article: http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=5489.

This is rumormongering at its finest. Tune in to /. tomorrow when we learn that an alien being masquerading as Elvis Presley (employed by Microsoft) is the true force behind the Linux kernel. The domain name elvix.com has already been registered by Microsoft.

Like the quote, but doesn't apply

[0x0d0a]

Group A marched to death camps:Group B marched to death camps::Optional, disableable copy protection schemes:Linux users being branded terrorists and being arrested by the government?

I don't buy it.

Re:Like the quote, but doesn't apply

[0x0d0a]

That's not what I was saying. I was in no way implying that Palladium is equivalent to Nazisim

That's not what I was saying either.

A:B::C:D means that the relationship of A to B is the same as that of C to D. I was saying that a person being marched off to a death camp is a much more reasonable indicator of another person being marched off to a death camp than an optional, disableable copy protection scheme being standardized is to thinking that Linux users will be classified as terrorists.

However, in a similar fashion if you say you aren't interested in opposing Palladium just because it currently is optional, then when the day comes that enough people are using it and it's made mandatory it will be too late to do anything about it.

It won't be made mandatory from a legislative perspective. Windows software could require it tomorrow if it wanted to -- I don't care one way or another about that. It doesn't affect me, and from a pragmatic standpoint, it doesn't affect Windows users. You can already make copy protection that's enough of a PITA that people won't bypass it. Have critical chunks of the application run as remote servlets.

AFAIK, MS is only going to make Palladium optional to begin with because they know they couldn't get away with forcing it on everyone all at once. Do you know otherwise? I could be mistaken on this.

Yes. I know one of the people that's fairly influential who's involved with TCPA. Microsoft is big, but it's dwarfed by the amount of power that's agreeing to sign on with TCPA. No way in hell would the TCPA members have agreed to required TCPA. It would have let the few corporations authorized to sign code have everyone else in the TCPA by the balls.

Also, hardware manufacturers don't really care whether you're working with illegal content or not. In the case of CDR/CDRW drives and hard drives, the mp3/divx boom has been extremely profitable -- *the* profit leader for the last few years. They do have significant benefit in producing an "industry agreed-upon DRM standard" so that the media industry can't force them (via leglislation) to put whatever expensive DRM method they prefer into their hardware.

Re:Yet another troll...

[spitzak]

Nonsense. The chip has access to large amounts of data at the same time, when it pages in memory into the cache. It can make a checksum of this, do a PK encryption of that, and compare it with another piece of data on some other page, and if it does not match it refuses to load the page. The system crashes soon after that. It has no need to "understand" what it is executing, it simply has to see if the data is correct.

This system is very bad news. Opt-out will be very short lived, as I'm sure MicroSoft expects Windows and many Windows apps to be broken very quickly, and the hackers will tell people to turn off TCPA to run the hacked binaries. Then the RIAA/MPAA will insist that the government make a regulation that requires people to stop making chips where it can be turned off.

5) Some hardware won't allow opt-out

[dpilot]

Right here we're all falling into "The Hollywood Trap." Their apparent belief is that all of us have computers for no reason other than to pirate their precious IP, which is why they're trying to push DRM so deep into the infrastructure.

Their starting point is simply wrong. The PC is a general purpose machine. Even if I'm using it to view/hear media, that's only one of the things I do with it. If I only wanted to view/hear media, I'd buy a DVD player and be done with it.

Especially since the DRM push includes Microsoft's Palladium, none of us believe it will be without glitches. There are going to be some PCs and PC parts that won't play some media. Sometimes it'll change from boot to boot. When booted in "DRM Mode" sometimes these PCs won't even boot at all, because there'll be a missed handshake of some sort in the DRM validation.

I'll put forth the guess that most of the time, DRM PCs will be booted in non-DRM mode, only booting DRM mode to view/hear DRM media. For several years, when booting DRM mode, it's going to be a hit-or-miss thing to hope the system really comes up, and really plays the media. (I'll guess at an 85-90% success rate to boot and play DRM media, elevated within 6-9 months to 90-95%, and slow progress after that.)

When the first PC maker gets to your step 5, that machine will be rejected in the marketplace.

Remember, the PC is a general-purpose machine, and DRM potentially impairs function, only allowing the PC to act like a DVD/CD player. It enables a side-purpose usually handled better by specialized hardware, and only gets in the way of the prime mission.

If all PC makers undertook Step 5 together, it might go, but that's not going to happen. Someone will be first with some model, and first the returns will be horrible, then sales will be dismal. Nobody will follow.

Won't help

[RelliK]

AMD has no choice in this matter. It needs to support palladium so that Microsoft ports windows to x86-64. Without windows, AMD is dead. Notice that Intel is doing the same thing -- again because it has no choice. Once again, Microsoft has everyone by the balls, so I suggest you instead direct your mail to One Microsoft Way.

Re:Won't help

[swb]

It'd probably be collusion, but where would Microsoft be without AMD and Intel? If AMD and Intel met in some dark alley one night and agreed that they were not going to support Palladium in their CPUs what would MS do?

No ... Again, this is day old news ...

[JoeGee]

... which has since been clarified. The original article referenced on /. is misleading. The Opteron has no more and no less ability to support DRM than any other x86 processor on the planet.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=5489.

Although AMD is a part of the Trusted Computing Initiative, it has not and will not for the foreseeable future optimize its processors for digital rights management. The reasons for the delay of CH and Opteron are the source of much speculation, but a sudden core revision to placate an initiative that hasn't even hit testing phase is most likely not one of them.

Misconception?

[0x0d0a]

Hmm. This is interesting. I've been going on what I know about TCPA, and just assumed that the Palladium people had been building on it. Evidently not.

Palladium, then, is more nasty and MS-specific. Hmm....

Palladium issues

[0x0d0a]

Also, while TCPA requires that it be user-disableable, I don't know whether Palladium does.

From the articles I just read, looks like MS may be doing Palladium specifically to do an end-run around the limitations placed on them in TCPA by the other members.

There are multiple TCPA key-signers. I'm interested to know who, exactly, other than Microsoft, can sign software.

If this is a Microsoft-only thing, it's pretty obvious what their goals are.

I submitted this story - Friday morning

[gosand]

I submitted this story Friday morning, when the story came out in other news sources, and it was rejected. So either the editors select who they accept stories from, or they have a 1.5 day backlog of stories.

harumph.

Re:What?

[TheGratefulNet]

you totally miss the point.

have you never been at work on a real workstation and wanted to buy something with your credit card? or listen to some music or watch a flash demo, etc, etc?

no, people don't use sun (etc) hardware at home, by in large. but to say that ONLY x86 style cpus matter for 'that enhanced internet experience' violates the whole idea of a platform-independant web (lets ignore the IE extensions for now..)

my point is that if you MUST use x86 hardware and software to have that full internet experience [sic] then its already broken by design.

x86 is NOT the world. and it is relevant to talk about non-x86 systems and non wintel as well.

AMD not good guy but SPIN guy.

[7-Vodka]

This is absolutely ridiculous.

"In fact, according to an AMD UK representative, AMD's Opteron products will run any kind of content in the future -- contrary to the report in The Age, on which our original report, below, was based."

Of course they will, but palladium is built in and people can check whether you're running in secure mode or not. If you're not they can refuse to let you d/l their film/music/application etc. There is no way to turn palladium off completely no matter what this AMD rep is trying to imply.

Part of the content in The Age failed to distinguish between comments Moorhead made and conjecture, AMD said. Yes,the reporter made a mistake but this still does not deny that palladium will be present in the opteron.

AMD, in fact, claims it is the "good guy", and even though it is a member of the "trusted computing" initiative, will allow users to opt in whether to use this type of technology or not.

There's no fucking way AMD is the good guy. They are including palladium in their chips. It is an OUTRIGHT LIE that users can opt in whether to use this or not. There is no way to completely opt out of using palladium hardware because the hardware will always correctly report whether you are in secure mode or not.

"There is nothing [in Hammer] that could actually prevent a user running unlicensed content," the representative from AMD said."

Correct! because that's how palladium is designed to work. You can be in secure mode, where you will be able to access palladium content, or you can be in unsecure mode (where you WILL be denied palladium content).
This is NOT a good thing. This is the method that M$ decided to use to SNEAK palladium in under the radar. Let those who don't wish to use it run in usecured mode, while the majority of the population will be cluelessly utilizing the palladium secure mode. They hope that then most media will require you to be in secure mode and even though you can still opt-out, in the end it will mean opting out of all the now dominant palladium only media.

Please please please don't mod shit like the parent up anymore. Yes, the reporter made a mistake, but that doesn't take away from the fact that palladium WILL be included in the opteron.

All of these /. comments are copying and pasting AMD SPIN on the story designed to FOOL you into thinking palladium is not included, or that you can completely opt out.

The truth is palladium is going to be included and you CANNOT FULLY OPT OUT. If AMD wants to really give users a way to fully opt out, they need to make their platform able to report on demand that they are running in secure mode when in fact they are not. They will not do this. Please stop reposting AMD SPIN on the issue it's making me fucking ill to my stomach. Thanks in advance.

$0.02

Re:Well I guess we can't win

[Com2Kid]

Good luck *getting* non-palladium media. Once this is out, the only pirated stuff you'll be able to get will be the old stuff.


Hehehehe, hardly. Unless they find a way to completely ditch the DVD standard and get people to switch over to something new Really Soon Now. ^_^

Not to mention that a goodly number of pirated videos are "screeners" meaning that it is a camera doing the work, with the data then dumped to a computer and compressed to whatever format.

And, with a palladium system, they could probably make it impossible to play non-palladium protected media files.

No, this would not work. Grandma would be pissed when she is unable to view pictures of Her Grand Kids on Her brand new Windows2004 Intel/AMD whatever computer.

Either that, or just disabled Palladium in the BIOS (as long as you can do this still. . . . not that I put too much faith in this "feature" ) and skip over the protected media files.

I mean who in the world wants to watch media that they have to PAY for any ways? :-D

Seriously though, you want to prevent this? Start backing independent artists RIGHT NOW DAMNIT any longer and it is going to be too late.

Get the independent artists to using current non-restricted media formats, show them that it can work to make them money, help to create an alternative infrastructures a content sources.

Re:Well I guess we can't win

[jbolden]

Wine won't help. A system running Wine will just be considered "insecure" and none of the content will show up in it. Palladium fully support insecure code by simply making the data inaccessable.

Excuse me...?

[Rui del-Negro]

So you're saying that when you're using, say, Winamp to play an Ogg file that you downloaded from the net, the CPU will be able to identify the song as "copyrighted" and will crash your system? Right...

Let me guess, the CPU includes a database with all copyrighted songs on Earth (plus all movies, all software, etc., and is able to compare all data that runs through it with this huge database)...? Then I guess we won't even need to rip our CDs anymore, we just have to find the song's address in this internal database...

For any piece of hardware to automagically identify a file as "copyrighted", it would need to have, hardcoded in it, intimate knowledge of the file format and decoding algorithms and it would need the file itself to have some detail that identified it as being copyrighted.

If you do it in software (ie, in the OS) the first part becomes easier. But the second part is still relevant. For a file to be tagged as "copyrighted", that tag must be added at some stage. In the specific case of music files, it would have to be added by the encoder. Do you think Microsoft would ever manage to convince, say, Xiph.org or Xing to support that kind of initiative?

I won't bother with the fact that this piece of Slashdot "news" has already been denied by AMD. I just ask you to think about it for a second. Do you think AMD would make a CPU that would refuse to run all software except Microsoft's? Especially a CPU that's aimed at small servers (hint: small servers don't normally run Windows)? And at a time when Asia (China particularly) is the fastest growing market for them (hint: China doesn't like Microsoft)?

And who cares about the RIAA or even american regulations? The world is a big place, you know? AMD's fabs are in Europe and Asia, and those two are their main markets (nearly 40% share, against only 15% in the USA).

Stop seeing conspiracies everywhere and start thinking about things for a change.

RMN
~~~

Re:Excuse me...?

[spitzak]

The CPU will not run anything that can decode OGG files. It will not play unsigned files. The encoder will not tag files as copyrighted, in fact there will be no encoder, there will be the side effect that the average person will not be able to make a recording (or at least not a portable one that can be played back on different devices). The RIAA will say "aww, that's a shame, but it is the price we have to pay to stop those awful terrorist-pirates". And now suddenly nobody can produce music without signing a contract with an RIAA house.

This stuff is going to happen. Knowing that it can happen, and convincing the general public that it will happen and that this is a serious threat, is the only way we are going to stop it from happening. So denying it, like you seem to want to, is wrong.

Re:You're missing the critical part

[jbolden]

Actually he was told this by Microsoft. This isn't hidden information; this is the exactly what's being talked about. BTW this setup was standard in secure OSes in the 1970's -- though they went the next step and eliminated a seperate file system so that there wasn't any static date to attack (i.e. you couldn't rip the harddrive out of a secure computer and get anything).

Time to unleash our tech powers...w/reverse buzz!

[Dr_Marvin_Monroe]

It's not that the two companies COULDN'T do that, it's that neither company WANTS to do that!

The hardware makers are in a cage too, if either one of them DOESN'T support it, they could hand the market share to the one that does. They're both FORCED by the margins to go along!...

The only answer lays with the consumer....DON'T BUY THIS PRODUCT....EVER!...

DONT EVEN LET IT GET A FOOTHOLD!.....

YOU!...the person reading this...use your influence as a tech person reading this list....tell everyone you know that
that "this Paladium thing sucks!" ....everyone you can!...tell "PC Magazine", the marketing droids at your company, technical manager in your department....tell your aunt that's calling about "getting a Dell"...tell everyone that talks with you about comptuters that this sucks....it's crippled....."it's really bad, I wouldn't spend my money on it..."

tell anyone asking you for tech advice..."...this Paladium thing sucks..."...

Work it into casual conversation..."..yeah, you know that this new Paladium thing REALLY sucks...."..

Need to kill this thing now...and we shouldn't take our collective power for granted on this one....you can bet that MS and RIAA are working up the "positive" buzz for this right now. I imagine that there will be a media campaign for this after Christmas season....

Nothing kills a new product faster than "consumer apathy," and for good measure, a heaping helping of distrust/dislike.

We need to start buzzing about this thing rather than quietly accepting defeat/takaway of our rights.

Re:Unreal Tournament..

[evilpaul13]

A game with no serial number to prevent making copies and playing them online is also a game I purchased two copies of. One for myself when it came out, and a second for $20 as a X-mas present for a friend. If developers make products worth buying, then they will sell many copies. cd-keys, and more draconian digital signing and activation nonsense only inconveniences legitimate purchasers when they try to use their *uncracked* licensed copies.

Re:Well I guess we can't win

[jbolden]

If you have opt out Palladium you can do the same things they do. If you don't have opt out having the source may not do you any good (depending how strict the setting are).

Re:uhh.....

[Billly Gates]

How about .....
""Q: Could Linux, FreeBSD or another open source OS create similar trust architecture?

A: From a technology perspective, it will be possible to develop a nexus that interoperates with other operating systems on the hardware of a "Palladium" PC. The "Palladium" PC design is covered by patents, and there will be intellectual property issues to be resolved. It is too early to speculate on how those issues might be addressed.
"

The statement you mentioned would only apply if you could turn palladium off. If it can be disabled then yes linux could run with some modifications. If it stays on by default, then yes linux would be illegal under patent laws and you bet ms would go after linus and the kernel developers themselves. It would not make bussiness sense not to on their part. Their own halloween documents mentioning patents as a way to block it and they might have found a way. My guess is they view palladium as the final battle agaisn't it. IF we were are going to have drm wether we like it or not I would prefer an industry wide approach with big linux backers who could defend linus and linux with the court costs. I was modded as flamebait and believe me I do not support these technologies. Its just that they are comming whether we like it or not and we need to pick sides or go mac and watch Linux die. Microsoft would be shooting themselves in the foot if they did not force motherboard makers to have palladium on by default in an effort to thrawt off linux and doing these things is how they came to whom they are today.

I'm doing them both

[twitter]

Though you can bet that your processor is gonna be way too slow to run any future apps so you should probably start hoarding software too.

Athlon 650, XP 1300, two k6/2 450s and enough for my wife and I to sit out the comming Paladium failure. As for hording, you should see all the Debian CDs I got sitting on the shelf, wink! If ever I get out from under bogus cable restrictions, I'll be happy to be a local mirror for software that does not suck so much processor that it does not work. My Debian installs have actually gotten smaller and faster in the last year. Tied togeter with simple ssh X fowarding, I won't feel an increase in processing demand if it ever comes.

Re:Opt out

[Grishnakh]

Considering that most consumer electronics are made in Asia, and Via (Taiwan) and Toshiba (Japan) have the ability to manufacture processors, if the rest of the world decided that DRM is crap, they'd easily be able to avoid DRM by just not buying American.

You think the USG's ban of crypto exports hurt anyone outside the US? Only the USG was stupid enough to believe that only Americans could write crypto.

Pd and non-Pd apps can run side-by-side

[yerricde]

Basically, they says to the effect that when a Palladium application is in memory, the OS will fail to allow non-Palladium applications to also be in memory.

That doesn't mean that they can't spawn a new virtual machine for each Palladium application. Microsoft doesn't have to implement exactly the system described in the patents. According to Microsoft's Palladium FAQ:

Third, unlike some antipiracy proposals endorsed by some content owners, no "Palladium" application can censor, monitor or disable another "Palladium" application -- or in fact any software running on a user's machine -- without the user's permission.

Applications that don't load Palladium.dll just won't be able to open any locked documents.

Re:Pd and non-Pd apps can run side-by-side

[RickHunter]

Only problem is that the bit you quoted doesn't mean what you say it means. They say that "no Palladium Application can censor, monitor, or disable", yatta yatta. Note the application bit in there. The OS is not the Palladium application. That quote says nothing about what the OS will or will not allow when a Palladium application is in memory.

Re:He'll read about it in the papers

[Grishnakh]

And I'd be willing to bet that as soon as that happened, that mpaa.com would be immediately switched to IIS and the guy responsible for using Linux/Apache would be out on his ass.

Disclaimer: I haven't checked netcraft to see what mpaa.com is actually running; this is just an example.

So who's organizing against Palladium?

[Dan Crash]

A Google search on the phrase "boycott Palladium" reveals no results. What I'd like to see is a website where individuals could sign their names, pledging that they will not upgrade to or support any chip manufacturer which supports Palladium. The site should also include information on why Palladium and the DRM OS are ideas with terrible consequences not just for computing freedom, but for freedom in general.

For those who could give a rat's ass about freedom -- and there are quite a few -- the website should remind them that Palladium will lead to a world of pay-per-use content.

AMD's line about Palladium being "optional" is just a smokescreen. To defeat Palladium, we have to defeat it AS an option. Anyone wanna list their favorite candidate for the site I described above?

Re:Bull

[guybarr]

what other chip manufacturers are there to fill in the gap? Here's a clue: None.

today, there are none, but if the (larger) non-american market realy rejects TCPA and the hardware, AND intel and AMD will refuse to fill that need (highly unlikely, IMHO, they will go where profit is), then new contenders will arrise. Not in a day. Not in a year. But they will.

Now the battle is in the court of consumer acceptance. As [insert favorite deity here] is my witness, I will NOT buy ANYTHING that has anything to do with Palladium. Let's see how many others have the same resolve.

again, I tend to think foreign goverments and buisnesses will be quite shy about such "improvements". Not because they like freedom (goverments seldom do), but because they understand the meaning of control, and will NOT want to give it to MS, AMD, or intel.

Because it worked sooo well last time.

[danro]

And we all know nobody outside the US had crypto until those laws was lifted, right?

It's not like the rest of the world couldn't design, program and build it's own stuff.
My (non US) university had courses in crypto where implementing RSA was a mandatory exercise long before US export restrictions were lifted. And I imagine every halfway decent CS program across the globe had it too.

DRM will be a huge ball and chain for the US hardware and software industries.
Even if europe plays along (not entirely certain) there is always asia.
I think the US is really digging the grave of their domestic tech industry, and I am not sure how I feel about that.
But, hey, less US dominance in software will probably curb Microsofts plans for "world domination".

We may actually see more real innovation and competition.
And hopefully a rise in marketshare for Free software.

Guess that would be a good thing.
A lot of USians may lose their jobs though...

Re:Hopefully ...

[RAMMS EIN]

So how do you flash your ROM with one that is not Palladium-compliant on a system that has all this Palladium tamper protection? Guess you meant: buy non-crippled hardware.

Re:Well I guess we can't win

[kcbrown]

With any Palladium system, you will be able to disable Palladium in BIOS, so it _doesn't matter_ if a system supports it or not.

That's a rather naive view, don't you think? Oh, sure, initially you'll be able to disable Palladium in the BIOS. Until Palladium-enabled OSes (i.e., the appropriate versions of Windows) are common enough that Microsoft can force hardware vendors to remove that option -- at which point you'll no longer be able to run a non-Palladium OS: you won't be able to run Linux.

Trust me, if Palladium isn't killed quickly then this will happen. Microsoft doesn't have those patents on Palladium for nothing, and remember that they want nothing less than the death of Free Software. Palladium is a means for Microsoft to achieve the dominance it craves. They wouldn't be pushing it otherwise.

Convicted in the court of public opinion

[yerricde]

mpaa.com would be immediately switched to IIS and the guy responsible for using Linux/Apache would be out on his ass.

Sure, out on his ass with respect to the record labels and movie studios, but in an article on the editorial page, where he helps convict the studios in the court of public opinion.

I haven't checked netcraft to see what mpaa.com is actually running; this is just an example.

www.mpaa.org and www.riaa.org run IIS on Windows 2000, but as I mentioned previously, a majority of the actual labels run Apache or AOLserver.

True...

[Rui del-Negro]

Yes, and computers will also read our lips and lock us out of our spaceships.

RMN
~~~

Re:Trollish non-sense...

[spitzak]

Yea, only illegal products are banned. That's just great. You know that laws can change and legal products can become illegal, right?

DeCSS was legal at one time.