Slashdot Mirror
Digg.com Attempts To Suppress HD-DVD Revolt
fieryprophet writes "An astonishing number of stories related to HD-DVD encryption keys have gone missing in action from digg.com, in many cases along with the account of the diggers who submitted them. Diggers are in open revolt against the moderators and are retaliating in clever and inventive ways. At one point, the entire front page comprised only stories that in one way or another were related to the hex number. Digg users quickly pointed to the HD DVD sponsorship of Diggnation, the Digg podcast show. Search digg for HD-DVD song lyrics, coffee mugs, shirts, and more for a small taste of the rebellion." Search Google for a broader picture; at this writing, about 283,000 pages contain the number with hyphens, and just under 10,000 without hyphens. There's a song. Several domain names including variations of the number have been reserved. Update: 05/02 05:44 GMT by J : New blog post from Kevin Rose of Digg to its users: "We hear you."
Digg took a big hit to their credibility today. They underestimated the outrage caused by the banning of users and removal of stories. Perhaps they'll learn that the site is made by the users. Without diggers, there is no digg.
Hell is other people - Jean-Paul Sartre
The fortune cookie at the bottom of the page reads -
"Anyone attempting to generate random numbers by deterministic means is, of course, living in a state of sin." -- John Von Neumann
Indeed.
It's only a partial dupe... The first story was about the HD DVD key getting censored on certain sites, and the second story was about Digg's front page getting trashed because they were one of the sites who was censoring it.
Slashdot deserves a big thumbs-up from the tech community for NOT being one of those sites!
I've been watching this develop tonight, and Digg has gone into meltdown, not so much in the technical sense but in the sense that the user base is in open revolt, posting stories containing the code and commenting on events over...and...over...and over. As quickly as one article is removed, two more appear, and the tone of them is getting angrier and angrier by the hour.
Just my opinion, but I don't see how Digg can come out of this with any credibility left. Was this ever about the DMCA? Perhaps in the beginning, but it's turned into a battle of wills between the Digg admins and its user base, and, even if the admins could somehow manage to magically obliterate every article on this subject, they're going to have a hard time explaining themselves to the user base, who are, by and large, mad as hell.
And to those who are, indeed, mad as hell, consider what you will do after this incident is over. Kevin and the other admins may indeed fear a lawsuit if they don't take these articles down. Is that wrong, or is the law that allows this possibility the thing that is wrong? It's easy to sit there and paste line after line of numbers, but what would you do in the face of a lawsuit, even if it it's a ridiculous lawsuit supported by a law crafted just for this kind of abuse? You're taking action now, but will you get organized to push for real change tomorrow, the day after, and the day after that?
Excuse me.
The MPAA (or whoever) is telling Digg to take down those stories.
They have the authority to do this thanks to the DMCA.
The DMCA is a law enacted by who? That's right, the government of the United States of America.
So who is threatening the people who run Digg with jail time? That's right, the United States of America.
How is that not censorship?
How we know is more important than what we know.
The thing is, Slashdot took off the Scientology crap because they were served a legal notice.
Also, Slashdot also provided a detailed writeup on what had happened, why they were taking down the said comments (which happened to paste entire texts) and gave some pointers on finding the said information.
Which is completely different from Digg removing the story and not telling anyone about it (until of course the users discovered it). And their response was an after-the-fact event, made worse by the fact that Digg receives sponsorship for Diggnation from the very folks this thing seems to piss off.
The two are completely different, and Slashdot did it right. Digg did not do it right and the users are revolting. More power to them.
While they can do what they want on their own site, it is more a matter of credibility than anything else right now. The whole revolt isn't even about the HD-DVD key. What has people feeling burnt is the fact that Digg purports to be about free and open user-driven content in a democratic setting, and what we're seeing here is a cabal of admins who are subverting the entire process of the system to suit their own whims.
Now as I said, it's not even about the 128-bit key anymore. And it's not about the DMCA or its merits(or lack thereof). The problem goes much deeper than that, and the encryption key debacle was more of a catalyst for what the more perceptive Diggers knew was going on all along but never really had any proof of. See, it's not just any posts containing the number they're removing. The Digg admins are removing and banning any discussion on the topic, even legitimate discussions on the ramifications of censorship in the user-driven internet era. Quite a few legitimate and thought-provoking discussions got clobbered when the admins got ban-happy today.
They have unwittingly set themselves up as a prime example of what can go wrong when marketing dollars(it is being reported that the HD-DVD guys throw ad dollars at Diggnation) meet the voice of the people. It is now being said that the Digg admins are stepping in and removing "objectionable" content when it conflicts with the will of their advertisers or displays any anti-Digg sentiment. While I'm sure this is good business sense, it's a very ugly way of being outed as a shill and a fraud to your readers. Digg is supposed to be the underdog who fought the status-quo and beat overwhelming odds against "the system". Now people are finding out that Digg has become the system, and they're a bit disillusioned that their hero Mr. Rose is just like any other business man who is out to make a buck. But like I said, the admins of Digg are obviously free to do with their site as they see fit. But Digg is only as good as the people who contribute to it. Kiss them good-bye and you kiss Digg good-bye.
"People should be allowed to keep midgets as pets."
- Gov. Jesse Ventura
It's pretty crappy, because according to the DMCA, they only have to take down content which they are specifically notified of. There's no way that the MPAA is keeping up with the storm on Digg, so it's got to be the admins being proactive. When you start censoring, you start losing some of the protections that the DMCA affords you. I doubt this will be the end of Digg, but if the MPAA got ballsy enough, they might try to shut the site down, since it's clearly impossible to keep all that user-submitted content off of the front page.
The DMCA rule is (loosely paraphrased): if a site doesn't censor its users posts and implements an automatic takedown system with notification to the user, then it's safe from copyright infringement claims (safe harbor provision). By doing this, the copyright claimants must ask for each offending comment to be removed individually, and each time some comment is removed, the user who posted the comment receives a realtime notification and he can decide that he's not infringing anything and is allowed to put the post back up. After that, the post cannot be removed again, unless a court looks at the case and makes a ruling.
If however a site censors or modifies its users posts, then it is effectively taking editorial ownership and *that* is when the site becomes potentially liable for copyright infringement claims by third parties.
They did no such thing, they used their own computer, own time, own disk.... at no time did they break into anyone's house, computer....
... I own the paper AND the ink, just not the story.
I buy a DVD, I own the disk, the holes, the metal - the bits. The only bit I don't own is the actual art content.
To put it in the context of a book
I can choose to read the book backwards, skip every second letter - and even read the boring publication bits at the front - all legally.
So don't give me this crap that reading the bytes off a DVD I own is illegal.
EMail: 0110001101100010010000000110001101110010 0110000101111010011011100110000101110010 0010111001100011011011110110
I'm the last one to defend the MPAA, but the only reason for sharing this number is so that cheapskates can get free movies. Right?
Not quite. The issue is wrapped up in the temper tantrum the RIAA and MPAA have been throwing for several years now that their distribution model is getting messed up. They have always used strong-arm tactics to manufacture a monopoly in a genre that is replete with passion and creativity--I'm talking about art. Of course, the MPAA and the RIAA don't protect the artist, or protect the consumer. They protect the BUSINESS MODEL. Their argument that if people copy media, it makes it harder to get media, has collapsed in the past few years, and they've started randomly suing people.
In fact, look into how much music we would never get to hear but for the industrious hobbyists and fanatics keeping the original vinyls of their favorite music in pristine condition. There are tons of classic recordings that record labels are sitting on, and if I were any one of those dead artists, I would rise up from my grave and unleash my motherfucking zombie face on those cocksuckers. It's unfair.
So, to the conclusion. The encryption keeps people from making backups of their movies. HD-DVDs are not archival quality, I'm betting, and I WILL NOT replace my fucking media at a "reasonable price" (retail, according to the MPAA and RIAA). When you share information that has a fair use, and you get threatened with legal action by a corporate behemoth, sometimes people rise up and defend you. If reason, logic, pleading, conscience, legal action, and appealing to their better nature have failed, why not try the million flies in the ointment method?
Oh, but if you copy an album, the artist doesn't get his 80 cents.
PS: It still fucks me off that the RIAA is trying to claim ownership of the fucking royalties to my music. Really.
Please stop stalking me, bro.
Slashdot is better than digg post-popularity. The only two clear incidents of censorship on slashdot that I remember - the scientology posts that were deleted, and the thread about story moderation - are both quite exceptional; the scientology censorship was done with as much publicity and openeness as could be expected, and the story-moderation censorship was (presumably) done by a now-disbanded and dishonoured editor (Michael Sims, 'Nazi Editor').
The point being: Slashdot has retained much or all of its independence; it survived the surge of popularity only to be bought up by a - as far as I can tell - benign corporate overlord, losing none of its independence and none of its verve (as much as the latter may seem to be lacking).
Digg, meanwhile, seems to be a short-lived exercise in user-defined content that has devolved into a juvenile comment squad and an editorship that is apparently willing to practice censorship for the basest of reasons.
The English word fart is one of the oldest words in the English vocabulary.
I think the answer is staring you in the face: as a nation, the U.S. imports a lot of physical goods, but exports a lot of intellectual property. Therefore, we reward companies who chisel their foreign suppliers into squeezing their employees, because this results in cheap imports here in the States. Likewise, we punish IP 'theft,' because IP is one of the last things that we seem to be able to produce and sell.
Now, I'm no fan of the DMCA, because I think it causes more damage and economic loss, here in the U.S., than it can or will ever possibly create in new IP-export revenue. But the logic driving it, when you separate it from the implementation, isn't that hard to understand, at least from a certain point of view. Allow me to illustrate how I think many people see the problem:
When we set aside irrational feelings of American exceptionalism -- those warm feelings that politicians always play to, when they talk about the "American worker" being the "best in the world" as if it was self-evident -- it is not immediately clear exactly how our previous success over the past century [1], necessarily translates into continued success in the future. In short, although everyone likes to say reassuring things like "Americans have always been at the forefront of innovation!", those words ring pretty hollow -- it's not clear why we would continue to be. We're not smarter than everyone else, our education system basically sucks, and we have a culture that's increasingly anti-intellectual and in some cases bordering on non-secular.
What this boils down to is: in a fully globalized economy, it's not clear what areas the U.S. will have a comparative advantage in. We'll probably always be able to export some agricultural products, but agricultural products do not a first-world civilization pay for. Same with natural resources like coal and timber but we'll need them here eventually, so we'd just be selling ourselves down the river. So what do you have left, when you've outsourced everything that can be outsourced to lower-cost second- and third-world areas? I think Neal Stephenson was onto something: music, movies, microcode, and pizza delivery.
'Pizza delivery' is the remaining service-sector crap that can't be outsourced. Music and movies are 'cultural exports,' things that for whatever reason, have a certain cachet in the rest of the world, and so don't really fall victim to direct price competition with foreign competitors. And microcode [1A] -- even if we're not the best at that, either, we'll use our monopoly to milk the rest of the world pretty good for as long as we can. But we can only do that if we can get them to buy into the legal framework which lets you sell IP as if it were physical goods. Hence, the DMCA and other 'strong IP' laws.
All of this is just my rather long-winded way of trying to explain why so many people (people in government in particular) are hooked on strong IP law (including the DMCA, DRM, and anti-circumvention), and proprietary software: they see it as a way to ensure that the U.S. can still make money doing the only thing that we seem to be good at. It may not seem at first glance to make a whole lot of sense, particularly to non-Americans, but I've met a lot of fairly powerful people who are very, very nervous about where the New/Global Economy is headed, and how the U.S. is going to maintain its standard of living [2] in the future. If you're looking for a near-magic solution, which you are if you're a politician, grabbing onto intellectual property as the salvation of high-cost Western society probably isn't the stupidest thing you'll do all day.
[1] Much of which is attributable to having had the good luck not to get involved in any home-turf land wars (like Europe, which got flattened, some of it twice) and getting on board the capitalism bus early (unlike Asia, which is just coming around to this whole market-economy business).
[1A] I'm using "microcode" here to represent basically all IP-derived exports, which includes most pharmaceuti
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
From the offical Digg blog, "But now, after seeing hundreds of stories and reading thousands of comments, you've made it clear. You'd rather see Digg go down fighting than bow down to a bigger company. We hear you, and effective immediately we won't delete stories or comments containing the code and will deal with whatever the consequences might be.
If we lose, then what the hell, at least we died trying."
At this point it looks like look much like a PR move. In an attempt to make themselves look good, they're acting like they're decided to take a stand against The Man, when in fact they're just bowing to pressure. Besides the fact that they just literally couldn't continue enforcing the censorship without turning off the site, they seem to ignore the fact that they didn't just remove articles containing the hex code, but articles containing the story of their censorship!
Slashdot isn't making a big deal out of their lack of censorship, and they aren't issuing a war cry- but I can write F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 without having to worry about my account being deleted, and that means more to me than some half-assed excuse.
Digg is attempting to shift the blame and rally a cause away from it, when it should be admitting that they all made a mistake and apologizing. Now its too late for them to gain the respect of their user base without a lot of long, hard work (if even that will be enough).
I feel bad for Kevin - I don't believe that anyone legitimately upset by this whole situation wants Digg to die. Unfortunately the moderators made a number of bad decisions that only made things worse. Perhaps they should've allowed one story on the topic and had everyone comment there. Keep that page up until they have a legitimate, hand delivered paper DMCA takedown request. Then users' anger would be focused where it really belongs (read MPAA).
With the moderators banning accounts and deleting posts, they took entirely the wrong approach, and are now suffering the consequences. Sadly, this may be a very, very hard lesson for Kevin / Digg.
When you create a social networking/commenting site, knowingly or not, you put yourself at the mercy of a large number of people who can be extremely volatile. Not a whole lot of difference between that and a good, old-fashioned mob of real people.
Here's hoping some good can come out of this whole unfortunate situation...
N.
"Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
Can you copyright a math problem? 'Cos if so, then I own the below.
2^6 x 5 x 19 x 12,043 x 216,493 x 836,256,503,069,278,983,442,067 = x
Solve for X and express in big-endian hexidecimal.
110100 1101000 1101000 1100110 0 1101111 1101000 1100011 1
Be careful that you're not simply writing off other people's opinions as propoganda because you don't agree with them. That could make you... eek... a republican.
There's an obvious explanation for the "corporate trolling" -- my generation which was in college when /. became popular, and we graduated from High School and College. Lots of us got recruited at places like Apple, IBM, MS, etc. It's kinda like, you might be able to tell in general when or how someone got broadband by if they use Friendster vs MSN Spaces vs MySpace vs... Or if they use AOL or Hotmail or GMail or MSN or Yahoo.
/. public's interpretation of the FUD that others are spreading. Of course, you might just have the stupid my-company-can-do-no-evil blinders on, too.
/., although many have also moved on. In time, the new popular places for geeks to hang out will be overrun with the next generation of corporate shills and OSS zealots. I've been called both by my friends at different points in time. :)
Computer nerds grow up to become corporate shills. Would you rather spend years at an unknown startup or game company, slaving away 24-7 on a product which may not succeed, or would you like an 8+ hour flexible time job with a nice $80K paycheck + benefits? If you had the latter, you might take a little pride in the company paying you, and you might know something that is being misconstrued and want to correct the
I have friends at places including Adobe, Apple, Amazon, IBM, Google, Microsoft, etc. They all read
and the story-moderation censorship was (presumably) done by a now-disbanded and dishonoured editor (Michael Sims, 'Nazi Editor').
And yet, some of us still appear to be banned from moderation, presumably because of that thread. I don't remember modding it, and I don't remember commenting on it (although I may have), but I certainly read it.
I've not been able to moderate since. It was a good couple of years before I could even meta-mod; going to metamod.pl directly (I didn't get the link on the front page) gave me a curt "you're not allowed to do this" message.
It may just be a coincidence, but with a 5-digit UID account that hit the karma cap back when karma was a number rather than a textual description and stayed there I can't see what other crime I could have committed.
(And no, I've never bothered to ask; to be honest, I don't really care. I just thought I'd point out that while the editor responsible may well have been let go, the fallout still exists)
It's official. Most of you are morons.
I love the way he's trying to make himself out as some kind of goddamn hero just because his revolting customers forced him to reverse himself on something he never should have done in the first place. Fucking sellout!
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Yeah, lets blame the guy who was attempting to keep himself from being sued and possibly more for ignoring a cease and desist order! Heaven forbid he try and protect himself and his site from legal action. His nerve in not listening to his users who are protected by anonymity, while he would be the one to bite the bullet!
When /. pulled the Scientology comment, they owned up to it like men. Kevin Rose tried to hide it like a bitch. Then, we he got called on it, suddenly he's posturing like he's John Wayne or something.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.