Bruce Schneier: IoT + DMCA = More Monopolies, Limits On Consumer Choice (theatlantic.com)
New submitter OldMan17 writes: On Dec 24, while many of us were busy in a frenzy of commercial excess and socially-conditioned good cheer, The Atlantic published an article by Bruce Schneier predicting that the IoT will be abused in conjunction with DMCA to make our lives worse instead of better. Some of the precedents he cites are old news, but I expect we will have a lively debate in the comments as to whether the over-arching conclusion is justified by his arguments. When everything is online, laws made for "the internet" suddenly apply to everything.
Which places even more limits on Consumer Choice.
https://wikileaks.org/tpp-ip3/
web site take-downs without court orders?
Illegal to modify devices you own?
etc.
The Internet of Things (IOT) is being driven by commercial interests that are more interesting in spying (known in commercial circles as marketing) and in control. Benefits will accrue, but they will not accrue to the people paying for the gear, which makes the IOT value subtracting for the average citizen.
Most people don't want nuance on the extent they own the goods they buy. This horse shit about you owning the physical properties, but licensing the software that is essential to its function is going to drive a deeper wedge between the public and IP than the corporate sector realizes. When your property rights become antithetical to mine, guess whose rights I'm going to choose...
White People Problems
Regardless of whether you're a white, black, brown, or pink-and-purple-polkadot, Mister Anonymous Coward, you are a racist and therefore part of the problems here in the United States just because you put things in those terms. I'm dead serious. The Human Race in general needs to get over this sort of shit, and if you're black? You need to stop perpetuating your own racial stereotypes, and you need to stop your own anti-white racism, because all you're accomplishing is perpetuating the vicious cycle of racism all around; knock that shit off.
ALL lives matter, not just Black lives, and anyone who doesn't agree with me can GO FUCK THEMSELVES.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
Tl;dr: https://xkcd.com/605/
Actually you misunderstand. Let me provide you with a point, As the demand for internet connected cars increases, you assume it will continue to increase. This is a logical fallacy. Imagine that the rate has increased 1% per year for the last 20 years and is now at 70%. Over 30 years you would expect the trend to continue to 100%. But why stop then? After 40 years you would have 110% demand, which is impossible.
There will be internet-less cars forever. They may decrease in prevalance, but they will remain. If 5% of the population wants an internet-free vehicle and 70% of vehicles are internet powered, that 5% demand has no effect on the market. But as soon as 96% is reached that leaves 4% of cars internet-free, while 5% of consumers want them. This will cause a price spike in internet free cars and car manufacturers will increase production to reach equilibrium with demand.
I think the SDOs (ISO, ANSI, IEEE, etc) made a fundamental mistake when they decided to accept patented technologies as part of formal (de jure) standards.
If I were King, the FRAND license cost for any patent that appears in a de jure standard would be $0. If the patent-holder won't give up the rights, then the technology should not appear in a standard. Now that clearly would restrict what can be standardized, but that's a tradeoff that both society and patent holders should accept.
(And technology R&D funded by governments should be royalty/license free. DoD certainly used to do that, and look at the advantages -commercial companies- have gotten from the fact that the basic Internet protocols are royalty free/not patented.)
Did you fail to read in the GP post that the interviewer told him that he was too old? "Too old" is one of those "few other specific criteria".
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!