Slashdot Mirror
Single-play DVDs a Hoax
psy writes "Ed Bott's blog states that in relation to a previously posted slashdot story "a hoax can spread just as fast as a genuine news story. That's the lesson from the bogus story published in an obscure UK business magazine yesterday that claimed Microsoft is about to unleash a new single-play DVD format.
Paul Thurrott reprinted the story without giving credit to the original source. Bink.nu picked up the story from Paul and reprinted it verbatim.
Techdirt commented on the original story, with attribution but without any fact-checking. So did John Walkenbach.
The funny part? There's no truth to the story. None whatsoever. In fact, the original story sparked a flurry of e-mails around Microsoft as people in different groups tried to figure out where on earth this story came from. After the head-scratching stopped, a spokesmen told me, they concluded that the story was not true. "It appears to be confusing an existing feature within Windows Media DRM that allows for single-play of promotional digital material. This has been an option for content owners to use for some time for the Windows Media format - it does not apply to MPEG2 content found on DVDs."
After the head-scratching stopped, a Microsoft spokesman told me, they concluded that the story was not true.
How do we know Ed Bott's comment is not a hoax too? He just said a MS spokesman told him so, but where's the source?
I believe the real story is, MS did invent this Play-Once DVD, however due to huge amount of negative comments from Slashdot, they pulled a PR spin, and instructed that spokesman to tell Ed that it's a hoax.
Don't you all feel bright now for bashing Microsoft? Perhaps it isn't only the editors that should check the credibility of a story?
Slashdot? propagating rumors? noooooooooooo..... must be some other blog....
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
I'm very glad that this was a hoax. It's a total waste to make disposable dvd's. Major environmental hazard, since no one would dispose correctly. Unless they also used the biodegradable (did I spell that right?) stuff I read about a while ago.
In Soviet Russia, hoax spread you!
The fact that so many people believed it leads me to believe that we will still see another single use DVD format one day, dispite the failure of Circuit City's Divx.
I find it's difficult to trust any "journalist". Take the complete failure of the journalistic trade before and during the ongoing war in Iraq, for instance. That's proof enough that the vast majority of journalists aren't qualified to perform their job.
Unlike engineering or medicine, for instance, there is no penalty for those journalists who fail to do their job properly. The complete lack of accountability had resulted in most mainstream newspapers, magazines and television news programs being nothing but farcery.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
It was probably a real idea except the people on slashdot trashed it so fast, they cancelled all project plans asap.
Maybe the submitter, Auckland Map, was trying to Google Bomb his way up the search results and generate traffic to his AdSense site?
Microsoft originally designed a single-play DVD. That much is true. It also had a new case. However, as time went by, they had to drop a number of features. The first to go was the 'DVD' part. Then they dropped the 'single-play' part. Now they just have a new case full of nothing.
Having said all that, do you think it is "real" this time?!? ;-)
Hulk SMASH Celiac Disease
Given that Slashdot was one of the "news" sites that perpetuated this myth, why aren't we seeing any kind of retraction or apology from the Slashdot editors that they screwed up in not fact-checking, especially on the original story? Would it be so hard for one of them to amend that story with a link to this one saying "sorry, this report isn't true"?
Somewhere in redmond, someone is using that slashdot story to make the case for Microsoft getting into play-once disk technology.
Although I'm sure that the Microsoft bit was a hoax, as far back as 2000 a company called Spectradisc, which has since been acquired by Flexplay, was actively working on a clear, chemical layer that would discolor when struck by the laser from the DVD player thus making the disc a single-play. They claim that their target market was for groups like the Academy Awards or those who want to offer promo material while preventing distribution or something like "pizza and a DVD", allowing the DVD to be viewed once.
Since then, Flexplay has used similar technology to discolor DVDs 48 hours after the case is open. In this case, the disc is sealed in an airtight container. When it comes in contact with oxygen, is begins the discoloration process to where it's unreadable in about 48 hours. Disney released several movies under the "EZ-D" label using this technology. It's the Circuit City DIVX scam in a new package.
I don't know if Flexplay is still pursuing the single-play DVD concept, but since they bought SpectraDisc they obviously have all of the research that SpectraDisc might have already done.
The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
OK, they aren't "single-play," but disposable DVD's have been around for YEARS. This was the first hit on Google:
wired news, 2003
I saw these for sale in a convinience store (Circle-K) TWO YEARS AGO. I haven't seen (noticed?) them lately, so they certainly didn't blow up in sales, but for heaven's sake: what are all of you smoking! Doesn't anybody read? (I'm not even talking about the article, I'm talking about tech news in general!) You guys call yourselves nerds? I can't believe all of these people are "up in arms" about a product that's been around and already failed in the marketplace. The only "hoax" is the idea that it was Microsoft; in fact, it was the arguably equally evil Disney that came up with this one.
Repetition does not transform a lie into the truth. - FDR
Factual errors are always going to happen. Humans make mistakes. Thurott published a story as fact with no sources. This is just as bad as making up a story. The Times fires people for making up stories.
Remember... ZG9uJ3QgZm9yZ2V0IHRvIGRyaW5rIHlvdXIgb3ZhbHRpbmU=
called it DIVX, sold three disks and ten players, and folded. didn't help circuit city one bit, the principal money behind it, and curiously, the only place that sold those doomed discs of death. disney tried it again last year, bombed. the market doesn't want bs in a box. stop trying to sell it to us.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
Balmer: "ARGH!" (tosses chair, breaks glass, rips off tie) "I will OWN THE MEDIA MARKET! I WILL KILL THEM ALL! So, what did they think of our single-play DVD?"
Assistant: "Uh...they laughed, Sir."
Balmer: "Oh!...Ummm...Okay...well...uh...let's play it as a hoax."
Assistant: "Yes, Sir. New chair, Sir?"
Balmer: "That would be nice, and some decaf!"
From the thread info:
"In fact, the original story sparked a flurry of e-mails around Microsoft as people in different groups tried to figure out where on earth this story came from. After the head-scratching stopped, a spokesmen told me, they concluded that the story was not true."
If it takes this much effort for one of the largest companies to come up with an answer to a seemingly simple question (let alone an IT company which sells software to orgnise information), it should cause us to re-think how we all organise business information. They should have had an answer in a few minutes (not) what seems to be several hours of communication between middle and upper management. Microsoft is not alone. I've worked for several large companies (one of which is a major market leader). Each time a "policy" or "product" question came up it would take hours or days to find out. Microsoft is not immune to this.
I was a witness in a court case. I stated my observations absolutely honestly and without bias. Anyone from either side of the case should have been able to see that my duty was to the court and that my own integrity was very important to me.
Somehow some idiot journalist did not see this, however. Through seemingly selective reporting and creative "quoting", I was somehow a bad guy. That story was then copied verbatim across many internet and print news outlets and it was even interpretted and "built on" by other idiot or perhaps dishonest journalists.
I no longer have any respect at all for the average journalist. They very rarely understand the issues they are reporting and sensationalize to the point of out-and-out lie. They do no favours to the subjects of their stories (except for the subjects who may be rich affiliates of course) and no favours to the general public who believe their lies.
War crimes, torture, lies, illegal spying... Would someone give Bush a blowjob, already, so he can be impeached?
The New York Times has had its problems, but their reporters are some of the best in the business, and while there is an editorial slant, it isn't extreme. The Atlantic provides good monthly material, and The Economist does so on a weekly basis. Those are my picks for daily, weekly, and monthly news, but there are other sources. The Christian Science Monitor is a great daily paper, for example. You may agree or disagree with my picks, but the profession of journalism isn't dead, and good sources of news are available.
I would also advance the notion that just because the editorial bias of a newspaper is disagreeable to you doesn't mean that the organization is corrupt. Newspapers are run by people, and people sometimes make mistakes. Note that during the runup to the Iraq invasion, The Atlantic provided excellent coverage and made many warnings that the Administration's plans were misguided. To me that is proof that following only one news source is a bad idea. You have to read from more than one source, whose biases you know, and make your own assessments from there.
I realize that it's de rigeur to bash on the news media, whether you're attacking from the Right or the Left, but the media is a business, and it gives people what they want. Americans need to take responsibility for at least some of the sorry state of our media. We have consistently voted in politicians who allowed the media conglomerates more and more power. We watch trash like Fox News. We read USA Today. That's not proof of a lack of credible journalism. It's proof that we're lazy.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
Copy prevention is mathematically impossible. Not just supremely difficult, like cracking RSA encryption; actually impossible. Like perpetual motion machines or faster-than-light travel. And limited-read media, by virtue of the fact they are as susceptible to copying as any other media now known or ever to be invented, do nothing to prevent illegal copying.
There was a bar that I used to drink in, back in my student days, which had a juke box. An NSM Prestige 160 if you care about these things; a lot like a Seeburg inside. It cost 10 pence a record {remember records?} and it was always playing. Once a fortnight, the amusement machine company came out to change the records. Well, one time, not only did they put in a whole load of new records, they also cranked up the price from 10p to 20p. And from that day on, the bar was like a Wetherspoons.
I guess the point I'm trying to make is that if DVDs cost £3 each instead of £20, then more people would be more prepared to buy them; and they'd actually sell enough copies to make more of a profit. Instead of waiting to see if one of my friends bought a movie I would like to watch {in a kind of "chicken" game, where the loser is the one who actually buys the disc and then has either to lend it out to everyone else, thereby risking the disc becoming trashed; or invite them over for a viewing, thereby risking an enormous cost in drink, drugs, broken furniture and freaked-out neighbours} we could all just buy our own copy of the disc, and not have to worry about the intricate politics of the situation. Likewise, there would be next to no market in "piracy", since the margins involved would be ridiculously small. Back in 1998-99, a "pirated" music CD cost £3 {handwritten track listing, labelled with indelible marker} or £4 {inkjet printed cover artwork and label}. Writers were rare, not much faster than 4* or 8* and hardly anybody had ADSL. As a cottage industry, it was fine for awhile but it soon became unsustainable.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!