Slashdot Mirror
Draconian DRM Revealed In Windows 7
TechForensics writes "A few days' testing of Windows 7 has already disclosed some draconian DRM, some of it unrelated to media files. A legitimate copy of Photoshop CS4 stopped functioning after we clobbered a nagging registration screen by replacing a DLL with a hacked version. With regard to media files, the days of capturing an audio program on your PC seem to be over (if the program originated on that PC). The inputs of your sound card are severely degraded in software if the card is also playing an audio program (tested here with Grooveshark). This may be the tip of the iceberg. Being in bed with the RIAA is bad enough, but locking your own files away from you is a tactic so outrageous it may kill the OS for many persons. Many users will not want to experiment with a second sound card or computer just to record from online sources, or boot up under a Linux that supports ntfs-3g just to control their files." Read on for more details of this user's findings.
Re — Photoshop: That Photoshop stopped functioning after we messed with one of its nag DLLs was not so much a surprise, but what was a surprise: Noting that Win7 allows programs like Photoshop to insert themselves stealthily into your firewall exception list. Further, that the OS allows large software vendors to penetrate your machine. Even further, that that permission is responsible for disabling of a program based on a modified DLL. And then finding that the OS even after reboot has locked you out of your own Local Settings folder; has denied you permission to move or delete the modified DLL; and refuses to allow the replacement of the Local Settings folder after it is unlocked with Unlocker to move it to the Desktop for examination (where it also denies you entry to your own folder). Setting permissions to 'allow everyone' was disabled!
Re — media: Under XP you could select 'Stereo Mix' or similar under audio recording inputs and nicely capture any program then playing. No longer.
Re — Photoshop: That Photoshop stopped functioning after we messed with one of its nag DLLs was not so much a surprise, but what was a surprise: Noting that Win7 allows programs like Photoshop to insert themselves stealthily into your firewall exception list. Further, that the OS allows large software vendors to penetrate your machine. Even further, that that permission is responsible for disabling of a program based on a modified DLL. And then finding that the OS even after reboot has locked you out of your own Local Settings folder; has denied you permission to move or delete the modified DLL; and refuses to allow the replacement of the Local Settings folder after it is unlocked with Unlocker to move it to the Desktop for examination (where it also denies you entry to your own folder). Setting permissions to 'allow everyone' was disabled!
Re — media: Under XP you could select 'Stereo Mix' or similar under audio recording inputs and nicely capture any program then playing. No longer.
For the sake of civil liberties, culture and sanity and as weird as it may seems I am not joking. Laws are made by the people for the people and some disconnected tenants of some ivory towers need to be reminded of it.
Even we can't defend you any more. If it happens in our computers, we're going to record it.
Fuck you.
Love,
All of us.
so your application stopped working after you fucked with the dll's, and it's microsoft's fault?
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
Let them! It will only help doom Windows. Younglings especially are not going to like when they can't rip their own version of their fav youtube music video, etc. "Web-tops" that don't run Windows are becoming increasingly popular, and those that offer less DRM are going to sell better.
Table-ized A.I.
Repealing the DRM clause of the DMCA would suffice.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Linux has gotten "good enough" on PC hardware that I just don't see any reason to even play the game anymore with Microsoft. Time to get off the ride. All of the "windows only" apps that I use seem to work under wine. The rest all have some open equivalent (firefox/thunderbird/openoffice/etc).
*shrug*
Boy am I glad that I finally took the plunge. Learning about the mac, messing with ubuntu. It took a long, long time to wean myself off but I've finally kicked the habit. I'm just so grateful there are alternatives. Up to recently I felt like a battered wife, hating Windows but still using it. Such a relief. (not trying to troll, just stating how I feel. For those who want to stay on Windows, my condolences.)
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
It seems that the problem was that Windows was cooperating with the app vendor to lock out such hacking attempts.
Who owns your computer? You or the ISV's?
maybe this will get more people to switch to linux or at the very least get more people to download the latest Ubuntu 9.x live cd (the one that supports natively supports ntfs).
Can we just go ahead and admit that the broken windows economy doesn't work.
Seriously, I don't think that it will take long for this to make Windows 7 as popular as Vista is. All we need to do is tell people that Kubuntu is Windows 7 and everything will be fine.
I jest of course. We really should tell them that the one that works is Linux, and the one that looks like it but doesn't work is Windows 7. I'm truly perplexed at the pace with which this one company tries to put itself in the red. There isn't much to say that doesn't come out as MS bashing when I hear this. Lets just throw it away and pretend it doesn't exist... quickly.
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
You think Windows 8 will have less DRM?
It's not like politicians have really cared that much about what the constitution has had to say for the past few decades anyway.
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
Do you honestly think they will learn from this mistake for Windows 8? They didn't learn much from Vista's mistakes.
That which does not kill me only postpones the inevitable.
That's the question. There are two kinds of DRM:
1) The kind that people do care about, like the Sony Rootkit or Spore's DRM. That's the kind they take notice and take exception to.
2) The kind that people accept and don't really notice, like iTunes DRM.
Microsoft is banking that their new DRM will be 2), as long as they don't do anything overt, like disable users' MP3 collections.
Still, with Linux getting easier to use to the point where regular people are willing to try it, this DRM could be the final nail in the coffin for a lot of Windows users.
This space left intentionally blank.
Unfortunately, I think you misunderestimate the capacity for not caring by the Public at Large. This will only affect a certain percentage of folks, not enough to make waves, I'm sure.
I'm beginning to think ... and hope ... that the "True Name" for Windows 7 is really going to be "Windows Chapter 7." Wouldn't that be nice?
Teen Angel - a Ghost Story
Can somebody post a readable, reasoned summary of this submission?
Um, forget I said "summary." This would need to be longer than the original. Maybe "commentary" is the right word...
Are you adequate?
Not that I don't believe this guy, but can we have some screen shots and some evidence before we scream and yell to the rest of the world?
If indeed Windows 7 does this, I know a lot of people that will get a "rude awakening" from DRM and they will not stand for it.
After Vista drove me to Linux, I was considering giving Windows 7 a chance, but news like this means I'll probably skip it and wait for Windows 8.
I guess I'll have to keep the XP machine I use for games running a little while longer.
I used Ubuntu and Gimp wouldn't start after my machine crashed, and my sound card inputs didn't work at all. Of course, that information is useless, just like the random anecdotes and wild conclusions in TFA.
"I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
For the sake of civil liberties, culture and sanity and as weird as it may seems I am not joking. Laws are made by the people for the people and some disconnected tenants of some ivory towers need to be reminded of it.
The Constitution doesn't regulate transactions between private parties. It regulates the powers granted to the Government. If you don't like the DRM in Windows 7/Vista/XP/whatever then vote with your feet and wallet. It's not like there aren't alternatives available.
You want to amend a document that's only been changed 27 times in ~200 years over computer software? Just think about what you are advocating for a minute.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
As much as I want to believe this, I'm not so sure that these effects are intentional.
First of all, can anyone duplicate them? Secondly, is a binary really the best way to test this? I would think that one would want to interact with whatever APIs control the recording process. In any case, I think that more investigative work needs to be done.
This is more like locksmiths complaining about the state putting better locks on their own houses.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Given the firewall issue and the sound card degradation it seems like windows 7 is begging to be run inside a Linux virtual machine so it can't get so cozy with the hardware.
Of course I have reason to believe they are already two steps ahed of me on that. When I run windows XP pro inside virtual box (host is Mac) then when I plug in my windows media device in the USB, windows media player only sees it as a USB disk not as a windows media device.
So i suspect that windows only sees those DRM devices if it can have direct hardware access. Presumably this is to prevent someone from making a software windows media device emulator.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Honestly, this is one of the worst-written front page stories on I've seen on ./ in quite some time. No citation, no proof, nothing. Not even a fucking link to a story? Please.
Win7 might very well be Evil Incarnate. But it's not like your gonna convince anyone with 'journalism' that reads along the line of "yeah this one guy I know says that win7 totally sucks".
Ok, it will generate some bad PR from the knowledgeable folks, like Vista. Some will avoid it. Most you notice that the compatibility problems are gone and you can find almost good drivers for almost everything.
What percentage of users are capable of hacking a dll? What percentage of users know what a firewall is, let alone check its configurations?
What can have some implications is the audio recording thing, if it does stop users from downloading videos from youtube. Most teens I know do this. And hell to microsoft if it messes with their sacred youtube, facebook and msn.
What worries me is that large corporations will like these features. "Hmm, a nice locked-down unhackable desktop. Yes, it will keep the network safe."
For me, their behaviour was outrageous enough in the XP times. I've switched to debian and never looked back.
entropy happens
While most casual users won't be bothered by this, the more tech savvy or people in the audio visual fields will be concerned.
While I fully understand the reasoning behind DRM, and while I may even agree with the principle (protecting your work), draconian DRM will send people the other way. It is now 2009. Generations are getting more and more tech savvy and educated. The internet is a huge social network. To not be able to record something and manipulate as you want can send people the other way.
So this is where Linux needs to step up. Microsoft is shooting themselves in the foot and Linux has the ability to take a big step forward. If you can record on Linux with no interference and you could be able to watch DVD with no interference on Linux on an out-of-box install, Linux could easily take over. Now we need the big Linux distros (Suse (shut up novell haters), Red Hat, Ubuntu, etc) to get on the software market to distribute versions for Linux. I don't mean it has to be open source, I mean it has to run on Linux. Natively. Without going through this config and that config to change things just to get it to run. Linux is on the right track, and with more and more being handed to it by Microsoft, it needs to get on the ball and make changes. Distros need to agree on where they put config files, on all distros. There would be nothing wrong with one main (but others available) package managers and packaging style. And there are other examples. And all this could be easily obtained.
That which does not kill me only postpones the inevitable.
This article is seriously short on details.
So you replaced a DLL and the application stopped working? What DLL? What evidence do you have supporting your theory that it is the OS's fault?
So you can no longer record application's audio? Are you using the same drivers? On my system the sound card has to specifically support such functionality.
Windows 7 might contain tons of scary DRM but unfortunately this article contains no real proof of that. In fact it is so vague that is sounds almost like voodoo.
1. What Photoshop CD4 dll? Does it do this with Vista? Does it do this with XP? Why is this attributed to Windows 7?
2. What sound card and driver? Does it do this with Vista? Does it do this with XP? Why is this attributed to Windows 7?
3. What build of Windows 7? Who is the testor? Why is two paragraphs of incomplete information hitting the front page and it's not an "Idle" post?
kdawson, you are truly an idiot.
It's not intuitive, but you can get access to ANY folder. You just need to give yourself ownership first.
Open a Windows Explorer window, navigate to the directory, right click on the it, select Properties, go to the resulting Security tab, and click the Advanced button contained there.
Click Edit, select "Administrators" from the list of potential owners, click the Replace owner on subcontainer and objects checkbox, then click the OK button.
After a couple minutes you'll be presented with a Window informing you that you need to close all property dialogs for the ownership changes to be visible. Follow this advice by clicking the OK button in the File Properties window and you should now be back at the Windows Explorer window you originally opened.
Right Click on the directory again and select Properties one additional time. Go to the Security tab, and click the Advanced button again also.
Click the Add.. button in the Permissions tab, type in Administrators as the name (ensure your Local Computer domain is selected), and select Full control from the list of available permissions. Click OK out of the Permission Entry dialog, select Replace all existing inheritable permissions on all descendants... then click OK from the Advanced dialog.
After a couple minutes you should once again be back at the File Properties dialog. Feel free to click OK and close Windows Explorer.
What do you mean?
This is a total "make-work" operating system, designed to get the economy going.
You need to:
-buy another FireWall program to block apps going through Windows built-in FireWall
-buy a program to enable to you access the files that the Windows GUI is preventing you from accessing
-buy a program to route audio to a file (like what WireTap Studio does on Mac OS X)
I am surprised, because I really didn't think MS could/would go further with their DRM lockdown than totally giving in to the big media labels (both audio and video). But I guess, this is just 4 more years of ideas from the labels, with some added input by the big software publishers...
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
It certainly made it illegal for two parties to sell liquor to one-another in the early 1920's. That's a private-party transaction if I've seen one.
- Sometimes you're the pidgeon, sometimes you're the statue.
That's what DRM is - it's software that takes ownership of your computer away from you, for as long as you use that software.
It's like HAL from 2001: A Space Odyssey, where you ask to do something core to the basic function of the hardware, and the software denies you access in order to fulfill the wishes of another. "I'm sorry, I can't do that, Dave," is replaced with disabled dialog elements.
Because as long as DRM is active, it really isn't your computer. Try to use it, and for reasons that aren't on a functional basis, it will refuse in favor of the wishes of another. Try to break those protections, and you've broken the law. By running DRM, your computer no longer exists to execute your instructions, but to execute the wishes of the DRM creator. That's what makes it "Digital Rights Management" - your rights and computer are being managed against what might be your intentions.
Ryan Fenton
- No valid article referenced here
- Posted by kdawson
- I've known several geeks over a very long time taking the effort to differentiate the words cracking and hacking. This joke of a slashdot posting laughs at me.
So an idiot used a pirated DLL to get rid of a nagging screen and somehow this means Windows 7 has draconian DRM. Jesus Christ...I meant to say, fucking idiots. Being in bed with RIAA? What sound card? what drivers? what the fuck?
How well did that work out again? ;)
If you think you can get 38 states to sign off on a DRM banning amendment then I guess all the power to you. Personally I think the GP's was a rather absurd suggestion. A better suggestion would be encouraging people to vote with their wallet and not give Microsoft the business. I certainly won't be buying it if the summary is accurate.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
It serves you right for following the annoying trend of writing the first line of your post in the goddamn title field.
There's an Ubuntu for that...
Sure, over a tied in internet browser. If you think the Government is going to get involved over measures theoretically designed to protect media from all those evil pirates then I'd like to remind you that half of the Democratic Party is a wholly owned subsidiary of Hollywood. The other half doesn't understand the issues well and does what the first half tells them to do.
Vote with your feet. There are alternatives available to Windows.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
I think there is a limit to the amount of DRM the average person is willing to accept in their OS.
And I don't think we're anywhere near that limit. For decades, gamers have been content to use computers whose operating systems are designed not to run any program that isn't approved by the computer's manufacturer. Think something like the iPhone App Store, except you have to have an LLC or corporation, dedicated office space, and a past published title on another platform, just to get the SDK.
The Constitution doesn't regulate transactions between private parties. It regulates the powers granted to the Government.
DRM in the US is not a transaction between two private parties. Instead, it is the *government* offering to step in and put legal force behind one party's interference with another's right to use their own property.
I suspect that the user upgraded to Win7 beta from XP - because ever since Vista there has been no "Local Settings" folder. In Vista, the old "Local Settings" folder which existed in XP was relocated to AppData\Local.
In the location of the old Local Settings folder is an NTFS junction, which merely redirects to the new AppData\Local location. Windows Explorer doesn't handle these junctions correctly and instead of redirecting you, will erroneously give you an "Access Denied" message.
Also, programs have always been able to insert themselves as exceptions into the Windows Firewall. Many applications which require internet access and which are blocked by the firewall will ask you if they can create a firewall exception for themselves. So programs have always been allowed to insert exceptions into the firewall - it's not a requirement that the program has to ask you first.
If a program is already running on your computer then it means the firewall is no longer responsible for stopping that application in any way - the firewall only protects against outside threats.
It's also far more likely that your modifications to the DLL broke something, which would explain why CS4 no longer worked. Why jump to the inane conclusion that Microsoft/Adobe are plotting against us all in some wild conspiracy?
precious, my little cupcake!
Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
Honestly. As a corporation, they act like their head was cut off a few years ago, but the body just keeps doing the same old things out of reflex, and refuses to fall over.
I am reminded of that newer TV show about the DEA, called "DEA".
I absolutely refuse to watch it. The DEA is fighting a war it LOST over 30 years ago, but that fact hasn't reached its brain yet. So it keeps stumbling around, doing the same old things the same old ways for the same old reasons, acting like it can cure societal ills through force.
They are both pathetic.
You will be called a troll...but I know you are saying the truth.
...Without going through this config and that config to change things just to get it to run. Linux is on the right track, and with more and more being handed to it by Microsoft, it needs to get on the ball and make changes. Distros need to agree on where they put config files, on all distros...
Now that's the truth...thank you!
But remember fellow slashdotter, Linux needs a beautiful interface. One that everyone or the majority of folks will look at and say "wow!" But when I suggested that Linux (read distros) needed a commonsense standard, one that will enable software to be installed from distro to distro, I was called a troll.
I am passionate GNOME user but I have looked at KDE 4.2 and what can be achieved with the QT toolkit. I must say QT is very capable and KDE 4.2 has lots of potential. When you look at the capabilities of the upcoming QT 4.5 release, you realize that Windows Vista and 7 can be given a run for their money without a lot of effort. So I supported KDE and have switched to it ever since.
Then the bombshell landed: I was informed by Linux zealots that what I call confusion on the Linux world is a feature that they, that use Linux, love to death. This is not helping us defeat Microsoft. Why is it so difficult to get?
It amazes me that folks that do the serious coding in Linux, create software that worries Microsoft and the like but cannot agree on a meaningful set of standard.
Thank you for your comment.
I mostly agree with your point. The quickest way to kill DRM is not to buy OR pirate anything that supports DRM.
My "fix" is to revoke the copyright for any programs that have DRM.
No DRMed program will ever enter the public domain in any real sense (in that it could be modified/built upon/etc.)
Unfortunately, if you are a gamer, there aren't alternatives available. :(
Large, well funded and powerful interest groups.
Oh, you said elected and not selected. Well obviously the masses elect who they're told to. Can't have one of those crazy third party candidates who aren't all ready bought and paid for get into office.
It seems patently obvious that is merely a file protection system (as per pervious versions of Windows since way back) and not any feature that could be confirmed as DRM. I'm not certain of this as I'm still tinkering with Windows 7, but it seems that the file protection has now been extended to applications that opt-in.
.dll file changing is most often an indicator of a virus/trojan, malware etc. Least often it is some power users patching a binary. This feature existed in some form in previous versions only for system files. It was pretty badly implemented but it did protect XP/2003 from some degree of attacks.
A
Largely this feature would be a good thing if extended to applications.
Application gets exploited: Windows cans it.
Unfortunately TFA goes straight to the assumption of DRM. They also don't really attempt to circumvent it or even to actually go see if you can turn SFC off in Windows 7 (looking for it now)
After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
Of course; having an amendment that says "DRM is bad" would be pretty silly.
The idea would be to neutralize the government's ability to back up DRM and similar tech (like Trusted Computing). DRM would be a noting but a waste of money and a fun challenge if not for the DMCA. Similarly, no one's going to waste their time and money on TC hardware unless they are forced to.
So I'd envision it more like:
"Congress shall pass no law limiting the rights of persons to manipulate, operate, or otherwise utilize as they see fit any of their possessions or effects, nor the sale or trade of tools to be used for such purposes."
There ya go, "The Hacker's Amendment". And it leaves plenty of room for interpretation, just like the rest of the Constitution...
The masses. Who thinks that even if we were living under Stalin but still had CNN and lived in the good old US of A that we were the most free country on the face of the planet ever and ever to be in the future. The masses don't care about DRM, in fact, the *AA would rather they not even know it existed. As long as people can point to a country and say those people there are oppressed and we look somewhat different then them, they will think they are free. As long as the media can throw out various human rights violations in China the masses won't think that its happening here.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
From what I've seen, there are very little changes in the audio layer from Vista to Windows 7. Now in Vista, all the audio DRM stuff relates to protected audio path and only matters if you are playing a DRM's file through a player that uses it. It has no effect, whatsoever, on media you produce. I say this as someone who has actually done plenty of audio production on a Vista system.
Now as for the audio thing it sounds like one or maybe both of two possibilities:
1) Crappy drivers. Windows 7 is still in the beta stage, and thus so are drivers for it. Some companies are rather fast with drivers for that and they are essentially release quality. Other companies suck at the drivers and thus have poor (or no) drivers out. Check a hardware board and you'll find all kinds of people saying "Where can I get Windows 7 drivers for my soundcard?"
2) Crappy hardware. Not all soundcards are created equal. You will find professional soundcards on the market that can handle 96 simultaneous inputs, 96 simultaneous outputs all at 24-bit 96kHz without dropping a sample. You'll also find cheap consumer cards that can't even do what they claim on the box. One thing that cheap cards have problems with more often than they should is operating full duplex, meaning outputting sound and inputting it at the same time. Some just plain can't do it, others can do it but have to cut the input or output sample rate, others are just flaky. Just because a soundcard has inputs, doesn't mean it deals with them well, since that is a feature many users don't make use of.
So I'd want to see this done in a properly controlled setup: It a quality, current, soundcard that is known to have good input and output quality, and known to have no issues doing both at the same time. Also ensure there are beta drives out from the company that don't state any major problems. Put it in a system and try it in Vista and make sure it works. Then Put Windows 7 on that same system, and try it again. If there's a problem, ok well then maybe there is something to this (though I'd still be interested in drivers). If not, and I suspect not, then this guy needs to STFU.
I get more than a little tired of morons who have a problem on their system and instantly run and blame the OS. No, it is often NOT the OS's fault. I get even more tried of all the FUD surrounding MS and DRM. I heard all this crap about Vista's audio DRM and how it was going to not let you control your own music. Well guess what? It is all 100% bullshit. You can record in Vista, you can mix and master in Vista, you can encode to non-DRM's format, including MS's own Windows Media format (which has no DRM by default, you have to set it up yourself). Vista doesn't at all mind or interfere.
This really strikes me as more of the same. I mean the guy is clearly a moron. He goes and downloads a crack for CS4, let's not play make believe like that's what he wasn't doing, and it doesn't work. So he blames Windows? What the hell? Then a random rant about audio. Ya, I'm thinking no.
I can't for sure say he's wrong, I've not yet test Windows 7 my self, but his story has all the markings of BS.
DRM in the US is not a transaction between two private parties. Instead, it is the *government* offering to step in and put legal force behind one party's interference with another's right to use their own property.
Once again, it's not property: it's information.
Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
It especially doesn't make sense as MS's yearly net profits exceed the entire gross revenues of either the recording or movie industries.
What's with the tail wagging the dog here?
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
Is DRM really what we're talking about here?
A legitimate copy of Photoshop CS4 stopped functioning after we clobbered a nagging registration screen by replacing a DLL with a hacked version.
People keep complaining about how easy it is for viruses and malware to infect Windows PCs. Microsoft and/or Adobe figure out a way to secure Photoshop to prevent the executable code from being modified, and you bitch that they shouldn't have. Not only that, but rather than doing some research to try to find out exactly why it doesn't work with your hacked DLL (and whether this security feature can be easily turned off), you blindly assume it must be some new invasive form of DRM that Microsoft is pushing on the unsuspecting masses.
With regard to media files, the days of capturing an audio program on your PC seem to be over (if the program originated on that PC). The inputs of your sound card are severely degraded in software if the card is also playing an audio program (tested here with Grooveshark). This may be the tip of the iceberg.
Is English your native language? If not, your grammar is definitely excusable. However, I think it's dangerous to confuse DRM itself (which is avoidable simply by refusing to purchase DRM-encumbered media) with attempts to close the analog hole, which are a pain in the ass for everybody.
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
As you may notice if you read my comment, it was about the DRMs and not about Windows version X (which I don't really care because I don't use at all). The DRMs are starting to be omnipresent and this is really bad, just try by yourself to copy a scene from a bluray movie to include it in a report, a parody, a backup or any other fair use, you will find that there are obstacles in your way.
Even if you would settle for a downgrade of the artwork it will be difficult to find something to convert the HDMI ouput signal to something recordable because of HDCP feature of HDMI.
Content publishers, hardware manufacturers and software publishers are working hands in hands to lock the cultural content in DRMs. To all this insanity you add the american DMCA and patent office to it and you will find that there is an oligopoly protected by the governement which is impeding seriously in your access to culture.
I'm not an american, I'm not even a constitutional expert in my country but I would think that access to culture should be a civil right and that any civil right should be part of the constitution of every countries.
Just think of what you are not advocating for a minute.
No. It is a fundamental right of companies to be able to include DRM in software along with everything else they see fit. The problem is it is also a fundamental right for someone to have the right to take it out, to use it however they see fit, to modify it, to change it, to install it on their toasters if they can make the binary run.
There is nothing wrong with software developers using DRM, it however is outragious that us, the consumers cannot change these programs to remove the DRM or make unrestricted files.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
If the DRM is disclosed up front and you still buy the product then you have no one to blame but yourself.
Most DRM would be irrelevant if the government weren't willing to throw people in the slammer for disabling it or helping others to disable it. Without this radical government intrusion into your own personal affairs, you wouldn't have to blame anyone because most DRM would be hacked into oblivion.
Just because the author does not know how to change something does not make it "locked".
Funny enough piracy is just an excuse to implement DRM. Making people buy media >N times for N devices instantly dwarfs any profits lost to pirates. The pirates will still buy the media 0 times for N devices, and honest law-abiding consumers will pay >N times to subsidise the pirates. It benefits everyone except the honest consumer.
The trend is towards more piracy, not less, so ultimately there will be 1 person paying for 2-3 billion copies and everyone else gets it free. Of course long before then DRM will be gone and people will return to paying for things zero or one times.
Sam ty sig.
If the DRM is disclosed up front
Since when is that the case? Unless you're willing to do a lot of research up front, it's not as though there's a DefectiveByDesign label on it.
and you still buy the product
Then you should still have the right to reverse engineer it. The DMCA is what made this a government issue. Repeal that and I don't care about touching the constitution.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
My hardware can operate on information, but the hardware is still my property.
Who elects those politicians?
The oligarchy appoints a set to choose from and mindless idiots pick the prettiest one.
Only his tendency toward a dazed stupor prevented him from screaming aloud.
Makes you wonder if the tail is really the *AAs and perhaps not some other group or agency that has friends in high places. Of course, it's conspiratorial for me to say anything like that. I have trouble seeing where the money is going with moves like this too, and sometimes think it's easy to say it's not money that is changing hands but perhaps a get out of jail free card or two.
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
A guy gets on here and makes a bunch of unsourced statements about MS and everyone laps them up like mother's milk.
It's funny how the most recent scuttlebutt has been about how Windows 7 is really just Vista SP3 and is no different from Vista and boy isn't it amazing how MS just keeps putting out Vista with a different name.
Yet apparently, this OS that is just another version of Vista is so radically different that it changes the very nature of hardware access.
Fully aware that the Nazi's will mod this down into invisibility, but had to post it anyway, for pete's sake people, get a life.
The media cartel would still make it more worthwhile to Microsoft - who have their own interests - to do these things than not do them.
The only thing they will respond to is a mass boycott. And considering this is Windows, which is pretty much locked into most large scale networks as it is, not to mention end users' homes, good luck.
Let's stop dilly-dallying and just change "-1: Overrated" to "-1: Disagree" or "-1: Doesn't Subscribe to Groupthink".
Then it is an issue for the courts to deal with, not legislators. (NEVER give congress something important to do, they'll fuck it up every time.)
Kdawson always posts complete and utter bullshit, but this really is over the line. I've been reading Slashdot for a long long time, but if this is seriously what makes it on the front page these days, there's really no point in even visiting here anymore.
It's been real everyone, last one out hit the lights.
Weird, none of the stuff in the article above is true on my Win 7 install. None of it. CS4 works like a charm, no hacking required. Capturing sound is really easy too, this whole thing is not just FUD, it's a bare-faced pack of lies. Shame on you /. for just accepting this utter nonsense because it speaks to your biases.
Windows 7 is the greatest thing since sliced bread. The most secure and fastest O/S Microsoft has ever released.
Oh come on.. They only released a beta recently. You can't really tell if it's that bad yet.
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.
While certainly a commendable course of action, it bears recognizing that a legislative revision is most certainly in order even if not at the level of a constitutional amendment, as it is currently, and rather ridiculously, a federal offense to work around such DRM, even if no copyright violation takes place. So, ostensibly, under the terms of the DMCA, even the act of installing a second sound card to try to get around this obnoxious and unconscionable crippling imposed by Microsoft, which impedes even the copying of a user's self-produced media, would itself comprise "circumvention" and put such a user at odds with the law. This is truly a ridiculous and untenable state of affairs.
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
You forgot to mention that there's only one company selling bikes, because they own all the roads and won't allow any other company's bikes on their roads.
Then they're convicted as a monopoly by government courts, but the government doesn't bother to actually stop any of this unfair behavior or make any effort to bring competition back to the marketplace.
So your only choice if you don't want to walk is to buy a broken bike from the only bike vendor there is, and then bitch about it.
Oh, or there's those other bikes with square wheels that you can only ride in the creek...
MS's yearly net profits exceed the entire gross revenues of either the recording or movie industries.
Aha! Proof that you damn kids with your pirating and your torrenting of bits and your, your, your... downloading... are costing them googles of money. Once Microsoft implements their perfect plan to keep you kids off the RIAA's lawn for good, their revenues will triple, or quadruple, or gazoople... or something.
Insightful and funny are really the same thing, except one has a punch line.
The DRMs are starting to be omnipresent and this is really bad
Says who? Apple and Amazon both offer DRM free music for download.
Content publishers, hardware manufacturers and software publishers are working hands in hands to lock the cultural content in DRMs
Again, says who? The only reason DRM is at all successful is because people continue to buy it. Stop buying DRM'ed products and they'll disappear pretty quickly.
but I would think that access to culture should be a civil right and that any civil right should be part of the constitution of every countries.
You can access culture. You just can't access some parts of culture because of the intentions of the publisher of that culture. Don't do business with him and he'll stop doing it or go out of business. Problem solved.
Just think of what you are not advocating for a minute.
I'm not advocating changing a 200 year old document over a software issue.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
The US Constitution already makes it explicit that the purpose of patents, copyrights, trademarks, and any other intellectual property law is "to promote the progress of science and the useful arts". All it takes is a judge to rule that a law making DRM enforceable is hindering scientific progress (or not time limited), and the law is unconstitutional, thus freeing people to circumvent DRM as appropriate.
Downloading the flv (with Flashgot media or otherwise) then using FLV Extract is faster and will result in better quality audio.
We know DRM exists and what it does. What is interesting to me is how few technology people know what it is. One of my older brothers makes his living supporting Microsoft apps and runs his whole home on various Microsoft technologies and when I mentioned to him about DRM, he asked me what that was and he thought I was crazy when I told him.
All of this stuff being written into the operating system sounds like a HUGE and CRAZY conspiracy theory... and yet we know it exists and whose interests it serves. How many other crackpot ideas get written off because they sound too far fetched to be believed? It isn't in Microsoft's interests to include what is there, so whose interests are they serving and why? We'll never know the answer to that. We only know that pure Open Source will never be able to hide those things.
You took a beta operating system, installed a cracked program, and then after some stuff went completely screwy, started blame Windows for all of this? I haven't really tested Windows 7 but I seriously doubt it locks you out of Local Settings folder. Adding Exceptions to Firewall has been around since XP and Vista but I believe if you have UAC enabled, it will complain about that. Usability vs Security and Microsoft compromised with UAC if I remember correctly. Besides, hoping your firewall picks up some nasty and prevents it communicating outbound after you have executed is little much.
Then, you took some Audio recording program which probably hasn't been updated for Windows 7 (and that's possibly cracked since your so willing to crack Photoshop) with beta quality drivers and ended up with some crappy quality audio. Instead of ruling out drivers, operating system compatibility between programs you were using and lack of any form of nasty payload on this cracked software, you have determined that Microsoft is completely in bed with RIAA and Adobe to completely screw everyone over.
This article doesn't even count as news, it looks like shit you would find on digg and kdawson should have his editor privileges revoked for letting this be cleared for publication. Next article cleared for publication by kdawson: "Black Helicopters seen over Redmond, Washington. Microsoft in bed with CIA and developing brain reader. Get your tinfoil."
True Apple Story -
I bought my wife an iPhone. First Apple product I've purchased in a LONG time. Makes for a lovely phone -- but we can't access the "Apple Store" and also can't put media onto the device. We use Solaris and Linux.
I get iTunes running under Wine, and sign up for the Apple Store. This allows my wife to buy from the Apple Store. Yeah!
Now, my wife wants a case for the device. She purchases a case; all seems good for a couple of days. But... the phone begins to behave "oddly". It turns the screen off, but leaves calls connected, and other (more minor) ailments.
We book an appointment to the Apple "Genius Bar". We are told we MUST attach the iPhone to a computer at least once; that the problem is the "old software". Ok, we explain that we have no computer capable. Answer: well, then use someone elses.. "Will you do it?". Answer: no.
My wife works as a librarian -- she has a circulation desk computer with Windows XP. Downloads and installs iTunes, plugs in the iPhone, and is asked "Do you want to sync automatically or manually?". That's really it! She chose "manual", because she didn't want to put all of her personal photos on that computer. Bad mistake... "Are you sure you want to upgrade?" "Yes" --- and BOOM! All the data is GONE. Just... vaporized... She calls Apple Support "Oh, yes, that would happen; there is nothing that can be done".
Miserable, miserable, miserable... Complete data destruction without even a "are you sure" dialog. And it's all iTunes fault. Why do we use it? DRM. The Apple iPhone databases CANNOT be updated without anything else. We have a perfectly servicable application (Amarok) that we use for playback, but it no longer works to load music. Gotta use that iTunes shitware. Even a self-booting DOS or Linux disk for updating, *or* a failsafe firmware updater...
And, as a final added insult -- the Genius Bar was wrong. The problem was that the iPhone 3G requires specific cases, and the case being used was wrong (it was an iPhone case). Go figure. I'm still buying a "Mac Mini" as an accessory to the iPhone, but still -- this is what DRM does. Locks out people who could possibly do a better job of it.
Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
Makes you wonder if the tail is really the *AAs and perhaps not some other group or agency that has friends in high places. Of course, it's conspiratorial for me to say anything like that.
It's the lizards. It's always the lizards.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
I think Windows is officially in the fading phase of its existence: Adobe has FINALLY (After first announcing it way back in 2003) released a 64 bit Flash player - and it's for Linux, not Windows. I think that's the first time I've ever seen a major release of anything coming out on Linux first.
Now we can go on and on about the suckitude of Flash and it's overuse, but I still think this Linux-only release is a great turning point for Windows and Linux. Especially now that word about worse DRM is in place on Windows 7. The latest flop of a dying fish.
I'll make a list.
I begin to see why people block kdawson articles.
Summary: Blaming Microsoft for behavior of third-party code, can't take 5 minutes to figure out where Stereo Mix recording has moved to, and declares that a folder that has been locked since Vista for compatibility reasons newly locked once he did something completely unrelated, without checking to see if it was related. Yup, sounds like fail to me.
Makes you wonder if the tail is really the *AAs and perhaps not some other group or agency that has friends in high places. Of course, it's conspiratorial for me to say anything like that.
It's the lizards. It's always the lizards.
You anti-amphibites make me sick.
I been saying it and saying it that the DRM in Win7 hadn't been turned on and that is why they are getting good performance out of it now. Vista Beta 1 ran great for me too, but that was the pre DRM version. All of this DRM crap has to monitor you to keep "criminals" like the owner of the PC from doing as they like 24/7/365. All of that monitoring takes up CPU and RAM that could have been used for your stuff.
Mark my words, what we are seeing here is the tiniest tip of the turd iceberg that is Win7, AKA Vista the second edition. It will go down in flames as folks find out it is a big pile of stink just like Vista. That is why just yesterday I had a customer literally throw money at me saying "make this %^&^&$ POS Vista go away! I don't want to see this thing again until XP is on it!". So mark my words, Linux guys. Be getting your A games ready. Be doing everything you can to fix the little irritants like Winprinters because when Vista7 goes down in flames you are going to have a LOT of POed folks looking for a new direction. And Apple is just too damned expensive for John Q. Average. So this is your shot, make it count. I doubt seriously after Win7 goes down in flames that Ballmer will have a job and the next guy they bring in will probably be one of the MS Office guys and he will go back to dull and boring business OSes(Oh,Lord,please let it be so!) so you guys probably won't get a third at bat.
I for one would like some healthy competition to make the marketplace more fair so don't miss your shot,make it count. Because a moron as stupid as Ballmer only comes around once in a lifetime and you don't want to miss it.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
It especially doesn't make sense as MS's yearly net profits exceed the entire gross revenues of either the recording or movie industries.
I'm glad to see I'm not the only person who's noticed that. I have long found it perplexing that the music and movie industries get to call the shots for the vastly larger software industry when it comes to legislation. I can only assume that the software industry must have some incredibly shitty lobbyists. It's not like it doesn't cost Microsoft money to pay developers to engineer their operating system to RIAA/MPAA specifications. If there aren't some large checks being written to MS to get this done, then Steve Ballmer is an even bigger meathead than I thought -- and do not underestimate how big of a meathead I think he is already.
It's more than the money, too. Our civilization would trundle along just fine if music and movie production ground to a total halt, but we have long since passed the point where we could operate without software, even Microsoft's buggy, insecure software.
Oh well, it's no skin off my nose. Ever since it became possible to run CS3 under WINE, the only reason I haven't switched completely to Linux is that I just haven't had the time to shift everything around. Time to get cracking, I guess.
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
Unfortunately, you'll never get manufacturers to ditch support for Windows like that, it quite simply has critical mass, and... Linux isn't ready for the mainstream yet.
No, but I'm guessing they were barking up the wrong tree. Here's a look at my User folder on a Windows 7 machine:
http://i42.tinypic.com/2cna2k5.png
Notice that a lot of the folders have shortcut arrows beside them? Well, they're not real shortcuts you just click on, they're just there for legacy programs. If a program tries to dump a file into "Local Settings", it will automatically be redirected to a different folder (Probably AppData/Roaming). Trying to double click any of those shortcuts bring an "access denied" error box, even the "My Documents" one, but I can access My Documents just fine by going to Documents as normal.
If the user in this case just did a bit of research, they'd probably find that the data they want is in AppData/Roaming/Adobe or something.
The only reason Windows doesn't let you change this is because it WILL break things and there's no reason for you to.
+1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
It's nice to see how easily a half-baked posting with vague "details" about theoretical "draconian DRM" makes the anti-Microsoft vitriol flow freely. "we replaced a nag dll with a hacked one and now it won't work" and "we can't find stereo mix" isn't news.
Here's my analysis of the situation: Microsoft isn't putting these features in at the demand of the RIAA/MPAA. They're putting them in to try to get a leg up on the competition. Media is increasingly becoming digital; music/movie download sites, streaming content, etc. Microsoft realizes this. So they decided to build the most appealing (to the RIAA/MPAA) content distribution platorm. This meant locking everything down at the OS level, so that users "cannot under any circumstances" copy the content. Of course, this isn't going to stop the hard-core pirates, who will always find a way around it. The only way to stop the copying of music and movies is to fully plug the analog hole, which is absolutely impossible without some sort of brain-computer interface that streams the content directly into the viewer's skull.
Bullshit, it's not even remotely close in the opposite direction.
M$ - $50 bil http://www.microsoft.com/msft/earnings/FY07/earn_rel_q4_07.mspx
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:hee_LWB259IJ:adage.com/images/random/mediafamilytree07.pdf+paramount+pictures+%22net+revenue%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a
brandelf -t FreeBSD
You misunderstand me. I wasn't "moaning", that was the gp. I don't think it's the place of the government to make DRM illegal. Not that it would make a bit of difference: Our fearless leaders don't give a flying fuck about the law anyway. The market will (eventually) decide that FOSS is simply better.
I was just correcting the parent, who thought he was posing a rhetorical question.
Only his tendency toward a dazed stupor prevented him from screaming aloud.
Actually I think I can explain that. if you look at the emails in the Comes VS Microsoft case they are all, including old evil Bill himself, collectively shitting their pants over Apple and the iPod, talking about how the WMP "scenarios" just suck ass when compared to iPod+iTunes. So what is their answer? More DRM! Lock down as many media outlets by offering cheaper and nastier DRM than Apple has and hope to lock in the customers to WMP and Windows, no matter how shitty the experience. What I think we are seeing here is those emails bearing fruit.
But don't believe me, read them yourself, especially those by Jim Allchin. As someone who has built, repaired, and sold MSFT products since the days of Win3.x even MY mouth dropped. How guys that have no fucking clue can get to be that high up in a company? Who knows. Maybe it is that "rise to your level of incompetence" thing. But I swear these guys actually BELIEVE they can beat the iPod by cranking up the DRM and then Creative and Dell(BWAHAHA!) will take the market. I shit you not. They have completely lost touch with reality and what the consumers want. At least in the past we could avoid their home shite by buying business OSes like WinNT and Win2K, but with Vista and Vista SE we are all stuck in the suck.
Oh, well. At least I will get to make money hand over fist as folks throw it at me to make Vista and Win7(Vista SE) go away and XP reappear. Because I have YET to have a customer that actually wanted the turd that is Vista. I have even been having my custom builds pick up, in spite of the economy, once I pointed out you can still get those with XP drivers. But I'd be happy to trade the extra business for a low resource business OS that would work with all my hardware and software. But it looks like until Ballmer is told to clean out his desk all we are going to get is DRM wrapped in shiny. Meanwhile my customers are hanging onto their XP discs I get them like the fat lady hangs onto the buffet bar.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
*pulls up his belt and adjusts his pocket-protector for maximum volume*
I am ready, captain!
EVERYTHING. Absolutely EVERYTHING in this article is incorrect.
* What kind of idiot blames the OS for "disabling a program based on a modified DLL." The OS has no such support, this is the APP either crashing or doing its own integrity check.
* Lots of apps ask you if you want to add the appropriate firewall rules during their installers. This has nothing to do with Adobe being a "large software vendor" - Stardock's apps do this too. Go read the API documentation on MSDN if you want to know more.
* The "sound degredation" thing is just unsubstantiated FUD.
* Microsoft in bed with the RIAA? Since when?
* Anyone can browse into their own Local Settings folder. Either this is further idiocy, or ::gasp:: someone hit a bug in a beta OS.
* "Stereo Mix" is a feature of some sound drivers.
And Slashdot proves again that it doesn't matter if something is true, so long as it makes Microsoft look bad.
You haven't "found" any DRM in Win7 because there isn't any (other than the same support for DRM'd WMA and WMV files that has existed in Vista and XP).
We only know that pure Open Source will never be able to hide those things.
See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underhanded_C_Contest
I was fine with a lot of the features in Vista -- it ran fine on a dual core machine, UAC wasn't really that irritating, and Aero was pretty nice. I used it and actually enjoyed it on a work machine. But there was no way in hell I would ever pay money to put it on my home machine, because it contains so many "features" that exist to take control away from you and hands them over to other people.
Microsoft is convinced that they can turn the PC into a glorified console, where it only runs what they allow to run. That's not right; it's my machine. It does what I say, not what somebody else says. And I don't think that's a completely geek stance, either. It's pretty easy to say to a layperson "a computer is meant to be a multi-purpose device, and Vista and Win7 lock down multiple functions and put them under someone else's control". I've tried it, and they do care. People will reject this nonsense if enough people raise a stink about the problem.
It worked for Vista, anyway.
Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
The Urban Hippie
MS knows it's buisness model is doomed and they are DESPERATE to replace windows and office with a similar cash cow.
They need a new monopoly and they are smart enough to realize that computer based entertainment centers are going to be worth an immense amount of money. If MS can get the public to expect their media OS/media box (Xbox 3?) as a standard living room feature they've just captured as much revenue as windows & office together have provided. It doesn't matter what they sell the actual units for if they control the screen and sell ads for the indefinite future. Moreover, it provides the same kind of lock in and opportunity to leverage market share they've used so effectively in the past. I'm sure that the MS gaming system will be the only one that integrates seemlessly with the media center and MS's near field interface devices will make it way easier to get your media onto the media center.
They've been trying to muscle into this field since long before apple released the ipod and they've consistantly failed. They are deathly afraid that apple will capture the space the way they did the portable music player market. If they can't beat them on design and interface MS figures it can beat them on content by cozying up to the media companies so apple will be left out in the cold.
Of course it would be pretty short sighted of the media industry to help MS without some very long term guarantees. If MS succeeds suddenly the relationship will flip around and the media companies will live or die at MS's whim.
If you liked this thought maybe you would find my blog nice too:
Windows didnt "do" anything here.
The poster is an idiot.
In Vista and W7 there are some folders that are locked down by default such that even admins dont (by default) have rights to change things.
But you know what? An admin can change anything in the system, so you just change the perms to allow yourself to do what you need to do.
The problem here isnt the great big evil windows coming to get you all, its that some windows users are idiots, and dont have a clue how the system works. So when something happens that they dont understand, they have a conniption and go screaming bloody murder.
This was pure PEBCAK, with some Adobe installer shittiness thrown in.
"That's not right; it's my machine. It does what I say, not what somebody else says."
Nice delusion, but totally false-to-fact. Maybe back in the day of the Altar or Apple II you could control the entire machine, but today you didn't write the OS, the BIOS, the device firmware, the drivers, the utilities, or the programs. You have no say in the matter.
And that applies to 99% of the Linux folk too. A single distro has millions of lines of code that no one person has ever read, thus you're placing your trust in others that all of that code is doing what you think it's doing. Maybe it is. And maybe it's not...
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
No evidence of any kind; not even any repeatable steps "system configurations, build numbers, etc".
The only time Windows ever degrades anything multimedia is when you play HD video (BluRay for example) and the vendor specifically states they want the output protected (so far nobody has set this flag) AND you don't have a secure-path display. Microsoft themselves admit this in clear and plain text; it's no secret.
This article here doesn't even explain how they themselves came to the conclusions they did; let alone any evidence from anywhere else. Complete and utter FUD, period.
throw new NoSignatureException();
There is a difference between "I don't know what this is doing so I cannot do it" and "I know exactly what this is doing and I cannot do it" one is lack of knowledge one is deliberate
It seems that Microsoft is going further an further down the route of "this is not your machine" ... well it is and formatting the hard-drive and installing something else will prove it ....
Puteulanus fenestra mortis
Actually, the problem there is that you assume MS does it to please the RIAA. In fact, it does it just to pwn their distribution channels. Sorta like the robber baron building two towers and a chain across a major river and putting up his own taxes: it's not as much for the benefit of the merchants sailing along the river, as for the baron's own benefit.
What MS is trying to do is make its own codecs the de-facto standard, and as impossible to move to another standard (e.g., to get that file recorded back as MP3) as physically possible. That the same DRM also makes the pill easier to swallow for the RIAA is just the icing on the cake. But in reality it's more like the KY Jelly on the shaft they're about to get.
Once MS owns the codec, it pretty much owns the distribution channel. It can launch its own Zune 2, car radios, etc, it can sell the music too, and/or tax anyone else who does with the royalties.
They're not the only ones who do. That's also why Sony made a big loss on the PS3 just to push its Blu-Ray format, or why it came up with the proprietary UMD, or why it stuck with its crap 48kbps music codecs even long after it started calling its portable crap "MP3 players." (You could transfer MP3s to them only via its own proprietary application, which actually converted them to the crap Sony codec, at a brutal loss of quality.) And you can probably find a couple more examples along the same lines.
But at any rate, it's not about pleasing the RIAA, it's about pwning another market. It's monopoly business as usual. Just incidentally that market happens to be the RIAA's distribution channel. Sweetening the pill a bit for them is good because you don't want them to say "we're not releasing anything in your format", but do note that MS would want DRM anyway there. They don't want you to get that DRM'ed music and then convert it to MP3 and play it on an iPod instead of a Zune.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
the government is enforcing contract law, as it does EVERYWHERE. You arent fucking forced to buy Windows. Go use linux and stop bitching.
You are like the kid who decides to go see a movie he will hate, so he can complain the movie sucks.
Some people just like whining
DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
Nice delusion, but totally false-to-fact. Maybe back in the day of the Altar or Apple II you could control the entire machine, but today you didn't write the OS, the BIOS, the device firmware, the drivers, the utilities, or the programs. You have no say in the matter.
Except you do, especially on Gentoo and LFS, where you can even make sure the code you're running is the code they say it is. You're not forced to blindly accept your OS, and that makes it credible. On LFS, you're encouraged to apply your own patches as you see fit.
DIY distros are fun, try it sometime.
Nice delusion, but totally false-to-fact. Maybe back in the day of the Altar or Apple II you could control the entire machine, but today you didn't write the OS, the BIOS, the device firmware, the drivers, the utilities, or the programs.
Nice faulty logic... But I see what you did there. (Emphasis mine)
To control your entire machine, you do not have to write a single line of code. You just have to be able to choose which code gets executed on it.
You have no say in the matter.
So this does not follow from your previous statements.
In fact, it seems that you never heard of the coreboot project, or firmware updates. And hell, I did write my OS, drivers, utilities and programs... together with other people. I chose what kernel to put on it. I chose the patches. I chose the programs.
If I want, I can change the firmware of my DVD drive to play music for me, write my own OS so I can use my keyboard to control the music it plays, and flash it into the BIOS.
I have complete control over my computer.
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
I think it's more likely that that "hacked" dll he used on photoshop was infected with some virus, and THAT is why he can no longer go into his own user folder.
If your computer starts acting up after you do something, blame yourself, not the computer.
The guy's an idiot.
Of course, this post is so far down the comments that very few people are going to see its wisdom...
A single distro has millions of lines of code that no one person has ever read, thus you're placing your trust in others that all of that code is doing what you think it's doing. Maybe it is. And maybe it's not
To a certain extent true but at least with Open Source Linux/Unix you can see the source and even modify if you can program or hire someone to do it. You can even replace it with a different distribution if you are not happy with the one you have and if you do it yourself he total cost to you is $0.00 and it is perfectly legal to do so.
:)
Placing your trust in others is no more different than driving a car. You hope it's reliable, you hope it's fuel won't destroy the engine, you hope that the road you are on has been properly maintained and you wish that slow driver in front of you would get out of your way
There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
Are you writing this on a Windows 7 machine? Probably a DRM problem with text copying/pasting then.
-- The Online Photo Editor - http://www.phixr.com
Oh please! Exactly what DRM are you talking about here? There is nothing in the original "article" that has anything to do with any DRM on Microsoft's part. Adobe's copy protection is mentioned, but how is the inability to crack it somehow Microsoft's fault?
Photoshop inserts itself into the firewall exceptions list? I agree that this should require a UAC elevation, but it is no different to how the firewall works on XP. It is not a Windows 7 issue, nor is it anything to do with DRM. Neither does not being able to move or delete a DLL that is in use. We had that problem back in the day of Windows 3.0!
It doesn't surprise me that someone would submit a crazy uninformed rant (especially the Firehose version of it - you have just got to read that version if you like a laugh). It also doesn't surprise me that kdawson would post it.
What does surprise me is how many people here accept the DRM claim without even thinking about it. Doesn't anyone wonder how Microsoft "allows large software vendors to penetrate your machine" without asking what it is that these large vendors can do that ANYONE with a compiler can't do? Why are people not pointing out that "Local Settings" is now stored as AppData\Local, and is still perfectly visible.
The XP system that I am using right now doesn't allow me to select 'Stereo Mix', probably because either the motherboard chipset or the drivers do not support it. Why jump to the conclusion that it is Microsoft's fault and not lousy hardware?
And if you claim that Windows 7 is faster because the DRM is turned off, what can you do in the beta now that you can't currently do in Vista?
No, I think you're the one with the weird definition of control.
I can choose to do whatever the hell I like with a linux system. I have more trust in it because the code can be (and has been) seen by multiple people, I can inspect it and change it to do what I like.
If I were to hear about a linux component pulling this sort of crap (and I would) then I would be free to remove it, disable it, alter it, break it, whatever. And I wouldn't have to hack or reverse engineer anything, because I have absolute control.
I don't know what your definition is, but by the sounds of it nobody is ever in control of a car (unless they built the engine, starting by smelting the iron ore)
Of course it would be pretty short sighted of the media industry to help MS without some very long term guarantees. If MS succeeds suddenly the relationship will flip around and the media companies will live or die at MS's whim.
You give the recording industry too much credit. They still don't understand digital content and the Internet. There was a great opportunity to profit from new business models that incorporated digital distribution but now they have this uphill war against "piracy" and end up with crazy laws and DRM.
Unicode in Slashdot
I have long found it perplexing that the music and movie industries get to call the shots for the vastly larger software industry when it comes to legislation. I can only assume that the software industry must have some incredibly shitty lobbyists. It's not like it doesn't cost Microsoft money to pay developers to engineer their operating system to RIAA/MPAA specifications.
It is a competitive advantage to M$ if they can claim competition is illegal - like that popular activities like listening to music or watching videos cannot be legally done in Linux.
I think he's basically right, too. MS is desperate to get in bed with the content providers so it can better compete with Apple, etc., in the mobile & media player market. Since the whole DRM paradigm is broken it probably won't work unless they figure an effective way to force Win 7 down everyone's throats. I think ultimately they'll just stop supporting xp, since after playing with win7 for a month I still don't see a compelling reason to "upgrade" from xp.
I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
Yep, there are pretty much two: Linux and BSD
Wow, and Slashdot used to be the place for people who knew about the open source world. BSD isn't an option, it's a family of options with three or four major ones (FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD and DragonflyBSD) and a few minor ones. There's also OpenSolaris if you want a UNIX-like system and prefer the SysV side of the family tree, and HURD is now usable, although doesn't support as much hardware as the other options, as is Minix 3.
But UNIX-like systems aren't the only open source operating systems out there. There others, like Haiku or ReactOS, which provide a completely different environment. There's Plan 9 if you want something more UNIX than UNIX, and more obscure ones, like Syllable, KolibriOS, MenuetOS, or AROS, are also usable.
There are lots of options out there. If you don't want a Free Software OS there are a lot of proprietary alternatives too, like SkyOS, QNX (Neutrino is quite a nice desktop), Zeta, and the two RiscOS derivatives.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Applications->Add/Remove->Install firestarter
If you googled for just 1 second you'd have found a GUI firewall.
Witness the new, higher end vehicles that can automatically keep you in your lane, or automatically apply the brakes when it thinks that you are not braking hard enough. Look at all the advanced traction/stability control/yaw control programs coming out that essentially drive the car for you instead of your own skills keeping the car from spinning out. Look at GM's OnStar system that can report in real time information on the vehicle's status, speed, passenger count, and can even eavesdrop on you with the car's microphone.
Did you know that your car most likely has the ability to tattletell on you? I own several vehicles, and in a few of them, the Engine Control Unit keeps track of tons of information - how much time I spend in each gear, how much time I spend at any given rev (and from that, how fast I have been), the five fastest speeds I've been up to (and what time those speeds were attained), how hot the engine has gotten, how many standing start launches I have done, and so on. This is all collected to aid in troubleshooting when there's an issue - but it has been used to deny warranty coverage if your driving patterns are "abusive." This type of detailed tracking of a car's behavior is pretty common in many kinds of cars.
So, no - I would not say that people are in control of their (newer) car.
All of the new Adobe CS4 collection of applications "phone home" now and here is why.
The license allows two installs of an application, based on concurrent use, for example Photoshop could be installed on your workstation and on your laptop with the understanding that you are only using one of them at a time. This is very common. Most applications simply force a registration of the serial number and only allow X number of activations, i.e. Microsoft Office. What Adobe does is check how many machines have that serial installed on it and if you attempt to activate a third it will tell you that you have exceeded the number allowed and that you must deactivate one of the other installs. The software makes it easy to deactivate itself so you can reinstall elsewhere. The silly part is that Adobe sets an entry in your hosts file pointing to activation.adobe.com or something close to that.
If you install the software the first time with your computer disconnected from the internet and change that host file entry to 127.0.0.1 and then reconnect to the internet it will not be able to call home and will assume it is installed on a machine that is not connected to the internet.
There is of course the well-known article about a bootstrap compiler with a non-source-visible built-in trapdoor that inserts that same trapdoor when it compiles its own source code. These are times when it's nice to know that there are sofware paranoids like Richard Stallman around. At least for the moment, I trust him and his ilk to deliver a bootstrap compiler to me that doesn't have a hidden trapdoor. I might not trust him to handle my social calendar or financial affairs, but my compiler, bootloader, etc, yes.
It's really hard to go through life without trusting someone. I feel much safer trusting people like the FSF, Linux, and OSS communities to develop and deliver my software than I do commercial software suppliers, Microsoft the example in this topic.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
People that do their own mixing are a very small percentage of total computer users. If it means getting a larger slice of the digital media pie, I'm sure Microsoft would gladly give up that market.
Besides, if big-name movies and music were only available through Microsoft's media distribution software, which is only available on Windows Seven, most people would have at least one Windows Seven computer. Even the people that do their own mixing; they'd probably have an audio workstation running Linux (because Mac OS seems to be cramming DRM in as well,) and a media-center running Windows.
And before people start arguing that it would be hard for Microsoft to compete with iTunes: Remember that the record labels want Apple to increase the DRM restrictions. I'm sure they'd jump ship fast if another company offered a product with the same capabilities and market penetration (a player that comes pre-installed on Windows computers would meet this part,) and more of the DRM that they want so badly.
I would assume that they allow installers signed by Microsoft-approved certificates to modify the firewall. This would mean that any only joe-the-hacker with a compiler can not do it.
A quick google search shows that this is wrong. Here is the officially published API. Or if you want, you can just write to the registry. Here is the code in C#. The C# compiler comes with .NET, so everyone can do this.
I guess this means that if you beef up the security on those registry keys then you could prevent any software from adding themselves to the exception list. Just make an Administrator account for installing that does not have access to those keys... I might have to try this out.
When, ahem, poking around in the Windows 7 kernel (ntoskrnl.exe), I found something interesting and new to Windows 7: it detects virtual machines. If it finds a virtual machine, it will check the Windows licensing data to see whether your edition of Windows is allowed to run as a VM. It seems like they're putting in enforcement of the EULA rules that were in Vista, but I have no way to test this, since the beta is the Ultimate edition.
The VM detection code itself is rather straightforward: it checks how long it takes to do an opcode that should be very quick ("mov rax, cr3"). Under a hardware VM, this would trap to the hypervisor, causing a delay. The code validates that "rdtsc" time is not elapsing excessively, which would indicate a hypervisor.
If you're making a hardware-assisted hypervisor, you should make use of the virtualization features of the CPU to apply an offset to rdtsc so that the traps to the hypervisor don't get detected this way. AMD processors support this; no idea about Intel.
"Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let's move on and steal the Java language." - Visual J++ Product Manager
You give the recording industry too much credit. They still don't understand digital content and the Internet. There was a great opportunity to profit from new business models that incorporated digital distribution but now they have this uphill war against "piracy" and end up with crazy laws and DRM.
It's the content industries that are either actively sawing off the
branch they're sitting on or letting new and acceptable forms of
innovation die on the vine. A lot of this new media stuff could have
been cut off by adequately exploiting what could be done with old
media. Before the rise of the "rip-mix-burn" mentality they had the
technology to allow for an iTunes style experience without divorcing
content from it's physical media.
They chose not to do that. The end result is that people stop thinking
in the limited terms that the media industry wants. They see what's
possible and start to stray off the reservation. It's not so much about
what is "legal" but about "control".
What I do with my media makes it remarkably more valuable. It makes it
more desirable. Sure it also could enable mooching. Dwelling on the
dark cloud doesn't necessarily make sense.
Just take the MPAA reaction to the VCR as an example.
This alone should be enough to convince the entire congress that
the media industry should be largely ignored for it's own good.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Mark my words, what we are seeing here is the tiniest tip of the turd iceberg that is Win7, AKA Vista the second edition. It will go down in flames as folks find out it is a big pile of stink just like Vista. That is why just yesterday I had a customer literally throw money at me saying "make this %^&^&$ POS Vista go away!
Shortly after Vista came out I gave it a spin and decided I didn't like what I was seeing or hearing from my friends/family who also were checking it out. Neighbors down the street would frequently ask me for 'advice' on solving Vista problems. Got to the point where I bought that T-Shirt from "Think Geek" which says "No I won't fix your computer".
I was building a new computer for myself and decided to switch to Ubuntu. I'm running 8.04 currently and haven't gone back. Heck, even my Windows games run perfectly under Ubuntu with WINE. HL2/TF2/CSS, Oblivion, UT2004 and so on.
My kids are sick and tired of Windows issue and have demanded I switch their computers over as well.
Microsoft is doing me a favor with Windows 7. Keep up the good work boys.
BTW, the neighbors asking for help, I've burned a copy of Ubuntu 8.04 for each and every one of them. If they want help then here ya go. I'm finished with Microsoft.
Has Comcast disconnected your Internet account? Same here. You can read about it at http://comcastissue.blogspot.com
All that proves is that Open Source is not a panacea that prevents all abuses (something I would hope we all know by now). What we do know is that it does make it possible for a programmer of above average mastery (or perhaps lower, depending on the code) of the language to decipher the code's function. Depending on the code involved it may, however, require rigorous inspection to find a flaw, particularly of the kind involved in the contest you mentioned.
This is where I take exception to the Wikipedia article; the article claims the programs in the contest should pass rigorous inspection but the actual contest makes no such claim. The contest only requires that the code pass visual inspection. I went and looked at one of the special mention entries for the 2005 contest by Natori Shin (picked at random). I went and did a visual inspection of the code and found nothing obvious. Scanning the code I saw some for loops that I recognized as initialization blocks but one stood out because of an if statement (with no else/else if) inside of it. I don't know about you but that throws up red flags for further inspection for me. A trivial inspection then reveals that the very first iteration of the loops fails the conditional and thus matrix[0][0] remains uninitialized.
Now, I'm an average C programmer at best. I freely admit that given a day or even more I probably would not be able to determine whether the code was malicious or exactly what the error resulted in. I almost never have to code anything in C and thus the vagaries of the stack and the ins and outs of the stat() function (both of which the code exploits, per the spoiler) are mostly a mystery to me. However, were I reviewing a patch containing code like this, I would reject it flat out for failure to initialize a structure that was used a few lines later.
That's what I think is disingenuous about using various C contests as a rebuttal to the strengths of Open Source; the fact that the code is out in the open does make it possible to detect (or at least prevent, even accidentally) malicious code fragments, something that is virtual impossible with closed source. Even if the malicious nature of the code cannot be readily determined, even by an expert, it would probably be rejected for basic violations of coding practice. Part of the reason many open source projects have and enforce a strict coding style is to prevent exactly these kinds of errors, malicious or not.
These are just subtly evil things too. Show me some patch(es) that modifies an existing major open source project that phones home with private user data or does some of the other things that have been mentioned in the comments here. If that patch can pass the auditing standards of the project and still accomplish that, then perhaps you'll have a point. In the meantime, the various C contests will remain a provocative challenge for C programmers to display their ingenuity and serve as a learning tool for the rest of us.
This is an anecdote from a user. Nowhere is there an article or anything like that - Just an anecdote.
Vista incorporates the same thing in a lot of cases. Remember the whole "network performance drops to 10% when playing an MP3" bit? Doesn't make it any nicer, but a lot of the things they're talking about here are already "features" in Vista. Still, things like audio loopback support can be enabled at the driver level, like with my Auzentech X-Fi Prelude's drivers for Vista, and if you use ASIO (which bypasses the kernel wherever possible) or something other than DSound, you'll probably retain your audio quality. So for people who actually need that sort of thing, they're already using the workaround (ASIO is very popular for professional use since its goal is to minimize latency in audio playback/recording, with the added effect of skipping any software/kernel processing, thus giving the cleanest signal). It's very possible, too, that the audio drivers being used were coded incorrectly, especially in the case of onboard audio. Downsampling and upsampling in software (especially in "realtime") is a nightmare for audio quality (ask any Soundblaster Live! user), and those beta drivers could have had a stopgap implementation of it.
And as for the Photoshop bit, that's probably more to do with Photoshop, as I doubt Windows 7 has a vast database of checksums for each and every program's files. And if it does, then wow. I'd like to point out that "Local Settings" doesn't exist in Vista OR Windows 7 (it's there for compatibility purposes, and will prevent the user from doing anything to it), and it's actually located in the Appdata\Local folder of your user folder.
Basically, what I'm saying is that these guys are just idiots (or maybe that should just read "this guy is an idiot"). Without any solid evidence that these things are actually Windows 7's fault, I'm having a hard time swallowing it, and I'm surprised (well, not really) at how many have jumped on the opportunity to spread the "love".
Whee, FUD!
Screw the rules, I have green hair!
Here you go, wiki is your friend! I would ask you to please note the following part, quote:"n order to prevent users from copying DRM content, Windows Vista provides process isolation and continually monitors what kernel-mode software is loaded." Please note the words CONTINUALLY MONITORS. You DO know that you can't get something for nothing right? And that everything has a cost? The ONLY way for the "protected path" DRM to work would be for it to monitor you 24/7/365, otherwise you could simply hack it or load an Alcohol 120% style virtual device with hacked keys BEFORE you loaded the DRM content. So to ensure you "filthy pirate you" that you don't pull any fast ones it HAS to monitor you 24/7.
So while all the Vista fans(all 6 of you) would love to think that they have invented some magically "resource free" DRM, sorry to burst your bubble. Everything costs, and DRM doesn't really have a prayer in hell if it can actually be turned off for ANY reason, even if you are not doing anything to actually NEED DRM. And if you want to know why you are being boned with this crap, please read Comes VS Microsoft to see where Jim Allchin and Bill Gates talk about DRM and their need for "scenarios" to try to shut down the iPod. pretty much ALL they talk about is how to lock in the users. And for those that work in business here is a view of Win7 from the enterprise perspective, and here is a view of Win7 from the performance POV.
I hope this illuminates readers and helps your realize that complaint about DRM are NOT FUD, but simply complaints about performance robbing crap that does ZERO for the user. I myself saw it with Vista Beta 1, which ran damned fast on this 3.6GHz P4 with 2GB of RAM, but when RTM rolled around and I got my free copy for Beta testing it was like those car commercials where they dump the ton of sludge on the race car. It sucked so bad I gave my copy of Vista away and last I heard it was being passed from person to person like an unwanted fruitcake.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
So I downloaded and installed the demo version for the latest release, to see what goodies it had. Not only did the Acrobat demo regularly try to sneakily "phone home", but when it did, it glitched my system, and caused conflicts with some other background processes that had a similarly cavalier attitude to thinking that THEY owned the computer (hello MS Update).
In the end, the program went into a death spiral where the failed home-phoning glitched the software itself in the middle of file operations, and somehow the thing ended up progressively corrupting its own files, until two weeks into the four-week demo period, the thing stopped twitching and finally died, and I had to unpick the unholy mess it left behind by hand, because even the uninstaller no longer worked.
Now, the sad thing is, for all I know, the program without the "phone home" stuff might well have been stable. I'd already bought an earlier version, and was serious about getting the update, partly from a misplaced sense of customer loyalty, and partly because I thought that the Adobe colour-conversion facilities might be better than on the free or near-free third-party PDF-editor apps.
But what the demo showed me was that (a) Adobe felt entitled to write stuff into their software to do stupid and dangerous things to my PC that I wasn't aware that I'd agreed to, and that I'd normally associate with malware, vaporising any residual sense of loyalty or trust, and (b) that there's no way in hell that I was going to run a piece of dangerous buggy shit like that on any important computer system.
So bye-bye Adobe product sale, and bye-bye any hope of me buying another Adobe product until they can prove that they can be trusted. I don't want that stuff anywhere near my hard drives.
Personally I think that there should be a list of companies whose products shouldn't be allowed onto any government or company (or educational) networks without breaking the network's security certification, and while Adobe are pulling shit like this, they ought to be on the list.
Eric Baird
TMFA is a masterful slashdot troll and a pretty flithy piece of FUD on the side.
So my question is who do I see about getting 10 minutes of my life back?
After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
Don't fool yourself, DRM is not about piracy. It is about inhibiting the exercise of fair use rights by legitimate customers and convincing them those rights do not exist. Rights such as format-shifting, time-shifting, personal backup copies, etc. DRM is just a way to increase their revenue stream because now instead of exercising your fair use right to copy that CD into your MP3 player you have to go pay another $1/song if they can convince you that right does not exist, or make exercising that right too difficult.
DRM has never, and will never, end real "piracy" as real pirate learn to bypass it with ease
If you cannot keep politics out of your moderation remove yourself from the Mod Lottery.. NOW!