If Ms supplied something that detected/removed/protected against up&down, (free, with no 'Genuine Advantage / Validation' bs), then I'm sure pretty soon all the media would link to that & the sheeple would rush to download & install... How about it, Redmond?
The virus does it's best to block attempts at removal as you'd expect, but still, you seem to be referring to something along these lines with specific instructions on detection and removal from M$, or perhaps even the Windows Live safety scanner, which despite it's crappy sounding name apparently detects and removes it.
Yes I know this is/. and bashing the evil corporation usually results in "sheeple" modding you up, but did you really think M$ wouldn't have thought about supplying people with the means to remove the virus? Did you even check before hitting submit?
This needs to be a pretty damn amazing versus experience to justify an additional cost. There are tons of games out there that don't try to kick you in the balls with a surcharge for versus gameplay, and I'm going to go out on a limb and predict that RE5's versus won't be anything special.
Still, I'm waiting with baited breath to see how many fools and their money are parted on the first day, before they've even tried it out.
This is a new story, set before the events of the games. Yes, it is set in the same Universe, but this is by no means the first time a fictional Universe has been host to prequels and sequels that are quite distinct. Star Trek anyone?
Also, why are they "struggling to milk money" out of this (highly successful) franchise? If they think people will pay money to read this stuff then why on earth wouldn't they do it? And yes, it is often much safer to continue with an existing concept than it is to start a new one.
I know exactly what you mean. I used to get his books from the library, but found them difficult to get into and, dare I say it, not particularly well written.
Nothing against Bear's fans, he's just not for me and I won't be getting excited about these upcoming books.
We Brits have made some amazing advances in quilting technology since you came. Come on back and marvel at the soft, almost sensual feel of our modern toilet paper.
It also helps if you don't crap in public toilets, and fork out for a decent hotel.
This was my understanding too. If it were as simple as changing a date to "set Conficker off" then they'd just be able to isolate the virus code and see what instructions are supposed to be executed when it actually "explodes" and runs the mailicious part.
The problem stems from the fact that the malicious part is supposedly going to be downloaded from a remote location, then run, on April 1st, and since Conficker is extremely successful at obfuscating the precise domain that it will access on this date, no-one can even tell where it'll be looking, let alone what'll be there when it finds it. Here's hoping it be a huge April Fool's joke, and that the "mailicious" code will just pop up a message along the lines of "STOP OPENING UNKNOWN E-MAIL ATTACHMENTS YOU MORON. IF YOU WANT PORN THEN GET A TORRENT CLIENT"
What does your UPS have to do with the Windows/Linux debate? Ubuntu is comaptible with a UPS....I get you so far. Windows isn't? Or was the whole power loss bit totally irrelevant?
Anyway, like the guy above said, being able to run an OS without a reboot for months on end isn't particularly relevant to your average user, and isn't the only measure of stability. My car needs a yearly service to keep it running smoothly, just like Windows needs a reboot every now and then to reclaim resources or whatever. Not ideal but who really gives a crap if I have to select Restart instead of Sleep when I go to bed?
My wife loves the Sims games, but there was no way in hell I was going to buy anything from EA after their crusade to screw customers who legally bought their game.
If Sims 3 looks good I might splash out on a copy for her, so EA have already increased their potential sales base. About time they saw sense.
At no point was I raging, however, you seem to have taken a slight bit of sarcasm being expressed as an indicator of extreme emotion. What does this imply about society as a whole? It seems many people are programmed in this manner nowadays. Interesting times.
Apologies if I misunderstood, I think I was biased by the raging that was directed at me in other posts in this discussion. I agree that these are interesting times, and it's a shame that my default interpretation of online words is often rage. So many of them, on/. and elsewhere, are often rage that its become natural for me to assume rage unless its clearly not. Maybe I'm too cynical...
A while back I had the ducts in my house cleaned and we found some old stashed gentlemens magazines.
Same thing happened to me in University. Needed to drag my mattress out to beat the dust out of it, picked it up only to find that the last occupant of my room had left a surprisingly large and broad variety of porn mags. It was an interesting moment since three people were helping me and I had a hard time explaining that I'd never seen them before.
Anyway, my point is that as we sat down to have a flick through (the mattress now abandoned on my floor) I pointed out that the level of nudity and graphic content was pretty tame compared to what one can find on the Internet. Hell, you can get more graphics pictures from Google than most British porn mags are allowed to publish. So while you highlight the changing frontiers over time, there's also the changing frontiers based on different mediums. The kinds of violence and nudity that makes a movie R-rated (18 in the UK I think? or 15? Whatever) might be freely available on the net without problems.
Youtube/Google makes millions upon millions of ad revenues from youtube. A clip that gets seen a lot generates more revenues.
Hands up anyone who's actually ever clicked an ad from YouTube. People watching video's doesn't magically make money come from nowhere. Until figures are freely available about exactly how much money Google make from YouTube, how much the PRS is demanding per view, and how many views these videos get per day this is all idle speculation.
I'm sure these figures are out there, but people seem more interested in discussing trivial details like Pete Waterman bitching about his £11 from Rick-rolls.
No he's right. I'm off to write a song now and post it on YouTube. I'm going to get all my friends to spend all day watching it over and over again for weeks. I'll get 25,000 views in no time and then demand free money from Google. Everybody wins!
And I will not stop you from ranting either... however, what happens when you have extremely limited connectivity? I spent 2.5 years in Iraq and I could only play my Steam based games for about a month after each vacation period spent back at home.
Well that's a shame I agree, but like I said before, this is a problem for a small amount of people. If I was in your situation I would have probably cracked the games that I'd bought so they could run without Steam. Legal grey area but you paid for them. Perhaps you should e-mail Valve asking them to address this problem...have you done that?
You also neglect to speak about selling games that you own... wait, you do not own them. You are paying money to use them. But I am sure that is OK to you.
strike
Again, like I said above, yes it's fine for me. I buy games cheaply and don't feel the need to make some money back from them. If you really have to resell every game you buy then simply avoid Steam games. Or again, contact Valve asking them what their opinion of first sales rights is, and ask them specifically why Steam doesn't allow people to sell the things they bought. Raging at me won't solve anything.
If I hang about on a Tube station platform, wearing a backpack, muttering to myself, and occasionally uttering "Gonna kill everyone.....that'll show them" to myself loud enough for people to hear, then I'll fully expect to be arrested on suspicion of being a terrorist, even if my backpack contains nothing at all.
If someone displays habits that would strongly suggest that they're breaching the rules they agreed to, even if they think the rules are unreasonable, then they should expect to have to explain themselves.
These games weren't freely available for download by anybody who wanted them. The only way to download them was from dodgy websites or something similar, fully aware that you were breaking the law. So in no way does this support your point about DRM having no positive aspects. DRM (e.g. through Steam) allows legal and easy downloads of games provided you bought them. I could use the list as "proof" that since distributing pirate games over the Internet has gotten easier, since download speeds have risen, that more and more sales have been lost to pirates. I'm not saying it's true but I think you get my point.
But to play devil's advocate, I'll play along. Most of the games on that list are old enough that DRM wasn't really needed, since the idea of downloading a game over dialup was a nightmare prospect. Pirating games before the Broadband revolution was harder, you have to admit. World of Warcraft is also on there, as are other subscription based MMO's, which are pretty much irrelevant to the DRM debate. Sure, I could pirate a copy of WoW, but what would be the point? The Sims games (and pretty much everything else on there) come with DRM built in, often much more intrusive than the simple CD checks you describe, and these DRM systems are totally independent of the method you use to obtain the game in the first place.
Consoles are a different ball game entirely, requiring physical intervention in the form of a mod chip or hacked firmware to allow DRM sidestepping. You say DRM doesn't cause console gamers and problems. Well it depends what you mean by problems. Not being able to pirate games is a problem for some people. Anyway, different topic really.
One final point, you ask about the craziness of allowing anyone to download a game - consider this, the music industry has finally agreed to drop DRM which affords the same result, in fact, more prominently because copying an MP3 or sending it via IM or something is trivial compared to downloading a whole game, and yet online music sales are still increasing.
True, but the music still isn't available for just anyone to download. You have to go through an online store that sure as hell makes sure you're paying for it. Passing it on to friends is still illegal, even when the DRM has been removed. Just because it's easier to spread music or games when they have no DRM doesn't mean it's suddenly legal, or indeed morally right. I hope you're starting to see what I mean when I say that Steam does actually provide some positive aspects through DRM, even if the same DRM has negatives as well.
My point, finally (since my colleagues are starting to notice that I'm spending a lot of today on/. instead of writing code) is that DRm can suck. Yes, it really can. SecureROM and other like it are true examples of DRM at it's worst. Now, I personally believe that DRM could be helping prevent piracy, but mostly in situations like online games where some central server (like a Valve master server) checks to make sure you have the right to play the game and then let's you join other people who are legally allowed to play it. DRM for single player games is pretty futile. Someone will crack the game, distribute it and anyone who wants it for free can play it. For me, Steam has a bunch of benefits. It's actually resulted in me buying more games than I normally would, especially older, cheaper games. This helps the publishers and developers since they now have my money to invest in future games. So, for me, it's win/win.
For you, it seems it's lose/lose. I respect that you feel this way, and also respect the calmness with which you've made your points in the face of pathetic AC trolls. I just have to disagree, since I also have respect for Valve who are at least trying to make DRM as unobtrusive as they can and provide some benefits that come with it.
Like I said, the inability to resell stuff is a potential problem. I never resell any games, as I like the opportunity to replay them even years later. So while I agree that in theory I'm annoyed that I can't sell my Steam games, I can't get too angry about it.
As for DRM having no positive apsects, and your thoughts that I could still download and play my games anywhere without DRM, then yes, you're probably right. If there were zero restrictions on who could download a Steam game, then I could indeed get it on any PC. But then so could anyone else, for free. Right? And where exactly is the benefit to the publisher/developer of the game in this system? I'm trying very hard to refrain from the kind of ridiculous abuse some AC trolls have hurled at you, but you're coming across as someone that thinks games being free for anyone to download at any time without any cost or restrictions is a good idea.
Maybe in some distant future where money is irrelevant, but today, here and now, people want money in return for their effort. DRM does help to enforce this to some extent. This helps the publishers. It's not going away. On the other hand, the same DRM mechanisms that prevent me from stealing also allow me to prove that I own a game (or rent it indefintiely, whatever) from anywhere, digitally. In theory, yes I could access my games if DRm didn't exist and download them, but in the real world why the hell woudl anybody except people wanting games for free think that is a good idea, or could possibly work in the real world?
You say that I assume DRM is essential. I'm a realist. I know that it is essential, because game developers and publishers think that it's necessary. A self-fulfilling prophecy if you will. Yeah it sucks, it's circular logic and it's a shame that everyone can't just pay for things instead of stealing them so we wouldn't need these protections, blah blah blah...
A friend of mine (on Steam ironically) can't play L4D with me because he can't afford it. He has a cracked version of L4D that he can play on hacked servers, or something. He's saving up (fairly young guy) to buy a proper copy of L4D so he can play with everyone else. If Steam's DRM wasn't preventing him from using the pirate version he'd never have even considered paying for a copy. Now, I don't agree with the idiotic statements from industry along the lines of "Every pirate copy is a lost sale". That's just plain horseshit. But some pirate copies are lost sales, and even more annoyingly for me is the fact that some little moron is playing the game for free which I had the decency to pay for, because I'm mature enough to understand that without money there would be no games industry. you say "It's well known that DRM achieves nothing". Bullshit. DRM can and does prevent piracy to some extent. If there was no DRM at all then I'll bet a hell of a lot of people who currently pay for games wouldn't bother. You also blithely ignore the fact that in some ways DRM can be positive. Restrictive DRM stops me from letting my friends install my copy of a game. positive DRM is what allows me to download my game to any computer just using my login credentials. Digitally managing my right to play my game on another computer. The fact that you think DRM means only restrictions is understandable, but that's more to do with the amount of dscussion of the negative aspects get compared to the positive aspects.
DRM has pros and cons, at least in the case of Steam. Spore is an example of DRM that's pretty much all negative, and to a ridiculous degree. Still, trying to covince people that abandoning DRM entirely is the way forward is a bit naive, and unrealistic. Instead we should be supporting companies like Valve that at least attempt to highlight the positive aspects of DRM.
Slashdot Mirror
If Ms supplied something that detected/removed/protected against up&down, (free, with no 'Genuine Advantage / Validation' bs), then I'm sure pretty soon all the media would link to that & the sheeple would rush to download & install... How about it, Redmond?
The virus does it's best to block attempts at removal as you'd expect, but still, you seem to be referring to something along these lines with specific instructions on detection and removal from M$, or perhaps even the Windows Live safety scanner, which despite it's crappy sounding name apparently detects and removes it.
/. and bashing the evil corporation usually results in "sheeple" modding you up, but did you really think M$ wouldn't have thought about supplying people with the means to remove the virus? Did you even check before hitting submit?
Yes I know this is
It's more like "You turned off autoupdates and don't have antivirus software, so watch out".
Conficker only affects out-of-date systems made vulnerable by idiots turning off security systems to gain a small performance improvement.
But hey, don't let me interrupt your "Bash M$; get karma" rant...
This needs to be a pretty damn amazing versus experience to justify an additional cost. There are tons of games out there that don't try to kick you in the balls with a surcharge for versus gameplay, and I'm going to go out on a limb and predict that RE5's versus won't be anything special.
Still, I'm waiting with baited breath to see how many fools and their money are parted on the first day, before they've even tried it out.
This is a new story, set before the events of the games. Yes, it is set in the same Universe, but this is by no means the first time a fictional Universe has been host to prequels and sequels that are quite distinct. Star Trek anyone?
Also, why are they "struggling to milk money" out of this (highly successful) franchise? If they think people will pay money to read this stuff then why on earth wouldn't they do it? And yes, it is often much safer to continue with an existing concept than it is to start a new one.
Nothing against Bear's fans, he's just not for me and I won't be getting excited about these upcoming books.
We Brits have made some amazing advances in quilting technology since you came. Come on back and marvel at the soft, almost sensual feel of our modern toilet paper.
It also helps if you don't crap in public toilets, and fork out for a decent hotel.
Not to mention the UK figures are for households, not individuals. Another example of "look what I can prove with badly used statistics".
And still it's modded up, so it must fool some people.
Breakaway steering column
Wait, wait, wait. You're telling me that my car's main control instrument is based on a design that is preceeded by the verb "breakaway".
I'm off to buy a bicycle.
The current path will still cost a gazillion dollars, just not scare the public in to rejecting it before it gets off the ground.
Some would say that's an unfortunate choice of words given the past "failures to launch".
So what you're saying is that they're piecing it together from guesses and the original notes written on the back of cigarette packets?
Good lord, NASA need to get their act together.
Hell, how many "safety" features are still in use today from the 60's in automobiles?
Anti-lock brakes and head restraints are the two most prominent.
Car seat belts were invented in the 50's. Wouldn't want a car without those.
NASA - Improving safety by employing designs from over 4 decades ago. You know those astronauts are in safe hands...
This was my understanding too. If it were as simple as changing a date to "set Conficker off" then they'd just be able to isolate the virus code and see what instructions are supposed to be executed when it actually "explodes" and runs the mailicious part.
The problem stems from the fact that the malicious part is supposedly going to be downloaded from a remote location, then run, on April 1st, and since Conficker is extremely successful at obfuscating the precise domain that it will access on this date, no-one can even tell where it'll be looking, let alone what'll be there when it finds it. Here's hoping it be a huge April Fool's joke, and that the "mailicious" code will just pop up a message along the lines of "STOP OPENING UNKNOWN E-MAIL ATTACHMENTS YOU MORON. IF YOU WANT PORN THEN GET A TORRENT CLIENT"
What does your UPS have to do with the Windows/Linux debate? Ubuntu is comaptible with a UPS....I get you so far. Windows isn't? Or was the whole power loss bit totally irrelevant?
Anyway, like the guy above said, being able to run an OS without a reboot for months on end isn't particularly relevant to your average user, and isn't the only measure of stability. My car needs a yearly service to keep it running smoothly, just like Windows needs a reboot every now and then to reclaim resources or whatever. Not ideal but who really gives a crap if I have to select Restart instead of Sleep when I go to bed?
We figured this out on Friday, and got code put together for Monday.
And with the ability to be remotely updated, Conficker will be immune to this by Tuesday.
My wife loves the Sims games, but there was no way in hell I was going to buy anything from EA after their crusade to screw customers who legally bought their game.
If Sims 3 looks good I might splash out on a copy for her, so EA have already increased their potential sales base. About time they saw sense.
At no point was I raging, however, you seem to have taken a slight bit of sarcasm being expressed as an indicator of extreme emotion. What does this imply about society as a whole? It seems many people are programmed in this manner nowadays. Interesting times.
Apologies if I misunderstood, I think I was biased by the raging that was directed at me in other posts in this discussion. I agree that these are interesting times, and it's a shame that my default interpretation of online words is often rage. So many of them, on /. and elsewhere, are often rage that its become natural for me to assume rage unless its clearly not. Maybe I'm too cynical...
A while back I had the ducts in my house cleaned and we found some old stashed gentlemens magazines.
Same thing happened to me in University. Needed to drag my mattress out to beat the dust out of it, picked it up only to find that the last occupant of my room had left a surprisingly large and broad variety of porn mags. It was an interesting moment since three people were helping me and I had a hard time explaining that I'd never seen them before.
Anyway, my point is that as we sat down to have a flick through (the mattress now abandoned on my floor) I pointed out that the level of nudity and graphic content was pretty tame compared to what one can find on the Internet. Hell, you can get more graphics pictures from Google than most British porn mags are allowed to publish. So while you highlight the changing frontiers over time, there's also the changing frontiers based on different mediums. The kinds of violence and nudity that makes a movie R-rated (18 in the UK I think? or 15? Whatever) might be freely available on the net without problems.
Youtube/Google makes millions upon millions of ad revenues from youtube. A clip that gets seen a lot generates more revenues.
Hands up anyone who's actually ever clicked an ad from YouTube. People watching video's doesn't magically make money come from nowhere. Until figures are freely available about exactly how much money Google make from YouTube, how much the PRS is demanding per view, and how many views these videos get per day this is all idle speculation.
I'm sure these figures are out there, but people seem more interested in discussing trivial details like Pete Waterman bitching about his £11 from Rick-rolls.
No he's right. I'm off to write a song now and post it on YouTube. I'm going to get all my friends to spend all day watching it over and over again for weeks. I'll get 25,000 views in no time and then demand free money from Google. Everybody wins!
And I will not stop you from ranting either... however, what happens when you have extremely limited connectivity? I spent 2.5 years in Iraq and I could only play my Steam based games for about a month after each vacation period spent back at home.
Well that's a shame I agree, but like I said before, this is a problem for a small amount of people. If I was in your situation I would have probably cracked the games that I'd bought so they could run without Steam. Legal grey area but you paid for them. Perhaps you should e-mail Valve asking them to address this problem...have you done that?
You also neglect to speak about selling games that you own... wait, you do not own them. You are paying money to use them. But I am sure that is OK to you.
strike
Again, like I said above, yes it's fine for me. I buy games cheaply and don't feel the need to make some money back from them. If you really have to resell every game you buy then simply avoid Steam games. Or again, contact Valve asking them what their opinion of first sales rights is, and ask them specifically why Steam doesn't allow people to sell the things they bought. Raging at me won't solve anything.
If I hang about on a Tube station platform, wearing a backpack, muttering to myself, and occasionally uttering "Gonna kill everyone.....that'll show them" to myself loud enough for people to hear, then I'll fully expect to be arrested on suspicion of being a terrorist, even if my backpack contains nothing at all.
If someone displays habits that would strongly suggest that they're breaching the rules they agreed to, even if they think the rules are unreasonable, then they should expect to have to explain themselves.
But to play devil's advocate, I'll play along. Most of the games on that list are old enough that DRM wasn't really needed, since the idea of downloading a game over dialup was a nightmare prospect. Pirating games before the Broadband revolution was harder, you have to admit. World of Warcraft is also on there, as are other subscription based MMO's, which are pretty much irrelevant to the DRM debate. Sure, I could pirate a copy of WoW, but what would be the point? The Sims games (and pretty much everything else on there) come with DRM built in, often much more intrusive than the simple CD checks you describe, and these DRM systems are totally independent of the method you use to obtain the game in the first place.
Consoles are a different ball game entirely, requiring physical intervention in the form of a mod chip or hacked firmware to allow DRM sidestepping. You say DRM doesn't cause console gamers and problems. Well it depends what you mean by problems. Not being able to pirate games is a problem for some people. Anyway, different topic really.
One final point, you ask about the craziness of allowing anyone to download a game - consider this, the music industry has finally agreed to drop DRM which affords the same result, in fact, more prominently because copying an MP3 or sending it via IM or something is trivial compared to downloading a whole game, and yet online music sales are still increasing.
True, but the music still isn't available for just anyone to download. You have to go through an online store that sure as hell makes sure you're paying for it. Passing it on to friends is still illegal, even when the DRM has been removed. Just because it's easier to spread music or games when they have no DRM doesn't mean it's suddenly legal, or indeed morally right. I hope you're starting to see what I mean when I say that Steam does actually provide some positive aspects through DRM, even if the same DRM has negatives as well.
/. instead of writing code) is that DRm can suck. Yes, it really can. SecureROM and other like it are true examples of DRM at it's worst. Now, I personally believe that DRM could be helping prevent piracy, but mostly in situations like online games where some central server (like a Valve master server) checks to make sure you have the right to play the game and then let's you join other people who are legally allowed to play it. DRM for single player games is pretty futile. Someone will crack the game, distribute it and anyone who wants it for free can play it. For me, Steam has a bunch of benefits. It's actually resulted in me buying more games than I normally would, especially older, cheaper games. This helps the publishers and developers since they now have my money to invest in future games. So, for me, it's win/win.
My point, finally (since my colleagues are starting to notice that I'm spending a lot of today on
For you, it seems it's lose/lose. I respect that you feel this way, and also respect the calmness with which you've made your points in the face of pathetic AC trolls. I just have to disagree, since I also have respect for Valve who are at least trying to make DRM as unobtrusive as they can and provide some benefits that come with it.
Like I said, the inability to resell stuff is a potential problem. I never resell any games, as I like the opportunity to replay them even years later. So while I agree that in theory I'm annoyed that I can't sell my Steam games, I can't get too angry about it.
As for DRM having no positive apsects, and your thoughts that I could still download and play my games anywhere without DRM, then yes, you're probably right. If there were zero restrictions on who could download a Steam game, then I could indeed get it on any PC. But then so could anyone else, for free. Right? And where exactly is the benefit to the publisher/developer of the game in this system? I'm trying very hard to refrain from the kind of ridiculous abuse some AC trolls have hurled at you, but you're coming across as someone that thinks games being free for anyone to download at any time without any cost or restrictions is a good idea.
Maybe in some distant future where money is irrelevant, but today, here and now, people want money in return for their effort. DRM does help to enforce this to some extent. This helps the publishers. It's not going away. On the other hand, the same DRM mechanisms that prevent me from stealing also allow me to prove that I own a game (or rent it indefintiely, whatever) from anywhere, digitally. In theory, yes I could access my games if DRm didn't exist and download them, but in the real world why the hell woudl anybody except people wanting games for free think that is a good idea, or could possibly work in the real world?
You say that I assume DRM is essential. I'm a realist. I know that it is essential, because game developers and publishers think that it's necessary. A self-fulfilling prophecy if you will. Yeah it sucks, it's circular logic and it's a shame that everyone can't just pay for things instead of stealing them so we wouldn't need these protections, blah blah blah...
A friend of mine (on Steam ironically) can't play L4D with me because he can't afford it. He has a cracked version of L4D that he can play on hacked servers, or something. He's saving up (fairly young guy) to buy a proper copy of L4D so he can play with everyone else. If Steam's DRM wasn't preventing him from using the pirate version he'd never have even considered paying for a copy. Now, I don't agree with the idiotic statements from industry along the lines of "Every pirate copy is a lost sale". That's just plain horseshit. But some pirate copies are lost sales, and even more annoyingly for me is the fact that some little moron is playing the game for free which I had the decency to pay for, because I'm mature enough to understand that without money there would be no games industry. you say "It's well known that DRM achieves nothing". Bullshit. DRM can and does prevent piracy to some extent. If there was no DRM at all then I'll bet a hell of a lot of people who currently pay for games wouldn't bother. You also blithely ignore the fact that in some ways DRM can be positive. Restrictive DRM stops me from letting my friends install my copy of a game. positive DRM is what allows me to download my game to any computer just using my login credentials. Digitally managing my right to play my game on another computer. The fact that you think DRM means only restrictions is understandable, but that's more to do with the amount of dscussion of the negative aspects get compared to the positive aspects.
DRM has pros and cons, at least in the case of Steam. Spore is an example of DRM that's pretty much all negative, and to a ridiculous degree. Still, trying to covince people that abandoning DRM entirely is the way forward is a bit naive, and unrealistic. Instead we should be supporting companies like Valve that at least attempt to highlight the positive aspects of DRM.