Tim Berners-Lee bowed down to the pressure of the MPAA and other entities to not allow that, which is a shitty thing to do considering this is being presented as an Internet standard.
Yup. But it's what we could expect from TBL. He's made his position on DRM painfully clear, and he doesn't seem like a "half measures" kind of guy.
Isn't the point of EME so you don't have to install a plugin/specfic browser/operating system?
No.
The EME is a standardized plugin mechanism. The DRM plugins themselves are proprietary and nothing prevents companies from requiring a specific one for specific platforms.
If DRM is to be grafted onto open standards (which I do not think it should be), then it should be available for everyone to use, not just the media corporations etc.
Actually, you can totally do this. Nothing prevents you from writing your own EME plugin.
The whole argument of "what I do in my private time is my business, as long as it doesn't affect my work" is preposterous.
How so? If it doesn't affect my work, why would it be any business of my employer?
Let's say that you have a perfect employee who likes frequenting bars right after work, and one day get his laptop stolen from their car...wouldn't you like to know how much "work" goes with them.
If you are taking company materials or communications off premises without adequate security, then you are not a "perfect employee" and the problem isn't that you enjoy going to bars.
What about someone who is wearing a jacket with the company logo on it while harassing women somewhere...
In what way would that reflect on the company? Do you mean that when someone behaves despicably while wearing Pepsi-branded clothing you think less of Pepsi?
European nations have their faults as well, so I'd dial that back a bit. That said, it seems pretty clear the the US is currently in decline (and that decline is accelerating), and many European nations are advancing.
Europeans think more like: 'How much of my life/self do I have to give up for this X?' In the US we're more like: 'How much money can I make with this X?''
Huh. I guess that I and most of the people I know are secret Europeans!
Do you really think that how a person chooses to handle their own personal information has any bearing whatsoever on how they would handle company information?
if those citizens cared for security they would make the change in their governments.
Wow. That's not a realistic response at all. In most of those governments (perhaps including the US), the only way to enact such a change is through violent revolution. Such an action is unlikely to succeed, and even if it does, it would take a long time and cost a whole lot of lives.
That's all rather beside the point, though. Regardless of whether or not there exist ways to change the situation politically, the fact remains that BB cannot be relied upon to provide a secure communications channel.
They're unacceptable at first blush because the companies that produce them get audio recordings. Those companies aren't nearly trustworthy enough for that level of access.
That developers can access the recordings as well makes it a million times worse. As untrustworthy as the companies are, random app developers are even less so.
As long as this data is being sent somewhere else, these devices will not have a place in my home.
You sound surprised, but shouldn't be! Microsoft's history makes this clear, and if you're too young to remember it firsthand, it's easily discoverable.
Well, it was, until BB decided it was OK to weaken security in exchange for being allowed to continue to sell phones in certain markets. That basically eliminated the only reason to use BB phones.
In fairness to Microsoft, Apple didn't understand the importance of apps at first either. They didn't even allow third parties to create them. In terms of apps, the difference between Apple and Microsoft is that Apple figured out and adapted to the reality of the business rather quickly.
Slashdot Mirror
It is not perfect, but it does make things better than they are now
I guess it depends on what you mean by "better". I don't see how it improves anything of importance to me, but it does make some things much worse.
"EME offers a better user experience"
Is this like one of those "up is down" or "black is white" postmodern things?
Sortof. It's really just a string of words devoid of any actual meaning whatsoever.
Tim Berners-Lee bowed down to the pressure of the MPAA and other entities to not allow that, which is a shitty thing to do considering this is being presented as an Internet standard.
Yup. But it's what we could expect from TBL. He's made his position on DRM painfully clear, and he doesn't seem like a "half measures" kind of guy.
You can always choose not to install the DRM plugins, even if the browser supports them.
Isn't the point of EME so you don't have to install a plugin/specfic browser/operating system?
No.
The EME is a standardized plugin mechanism. The DRM plugins themselves are proprietary and nothing prevents companies from requiring a specific one for specific platforms.
Actually no you're not allowed to create a browser without the EME api because it's part of the GOD DAMNED STANDARD YOU MORON!
Sure you can. Nobody can or will stop you from making a browser that implements all of the standard except the DRM.
If DRM is to be grafted onto open standards (which I do not think it should be), then it should be available for everyone to use, not just the media corporations etc.
Actually, you can totally do this. Nothing prevents you from writing your own EME plugin.
Exactly. What the EME really does is make DRM more politically acceptable. It doesn't give any technical advantages over the old way.
That's precisely why it should not be part of the standard.
No, it really doesn't make open source browser impossible. They're just as possible as always.
You just won't have open source DRM plugins, exactly like is the situation now.
Technically speaking, the EME does make DRM a plugin. It's just a different plugin mechanism than used to be used.
The whole "standardization" argument for the EME is bullshit. You still have to run proprietary plugins.
The whole argument of "what I do in my private time is my business, as long as it doesn't affect my work" is preposterous.
How so? If it doesn't affect my work, why would it be any business of my employer?
Let's say that you have a perfect employee who likes frequenting bars right after work, and one day get his laptop stolen from their car...wouldn't you like to know how much "work" goes with them.
If you are taking company materials or communications off premises without adequate security, then you are not a "perfect employee" and the problem isn't that you enjoy going to bars.
What about someone who is wearing a jacket with the company logo on it while harassing women somewhere...
In what way would that reflect on the company? Do you mean that when someone behaves despicably while wearing Pepsi-branded clothing you think less of Pepsi?
European nations have their faults as well, so I'd dial that back a bit. That said, it seems pretty clear the the US is currently in decline (and that decline is accelerating), and many European nations are advancing.
Europeans think more like:
'How much of my life/self do I have to give up for this X?' In the US we're more like: 'How much money can I make with this X?''
Huh. I guess that I and most of the people I know are secret Europeans!
I seem to recall on job applications there being a place to fill in your marital status, and your DOB....?
Not on any of the applications I've filled out in the last couple of decades. That information is asked for after the hire is made, but not before.
Do you really think that how a person chooses to handle their own personal information has any bearing whatsoever on how they would handle company information?
Because that's ludicrous.
That's not even close to being true.
And even if it is illegal, you'd have to prove that's why you were passed over. That's a tough nut to crack.
That means that in the US, you would consider 20% of the population "highly suspicious".
Don't use social media, or at the very least, don't use social media in a way that can be connected to you. It works for me.
Yes, that was what I was referring to.
if those citizens cared for security they would make the change in their governments.
Wow. That's not a realistic response at all. In most of those governments (perhaps including the US), the only way to enact such a change is through violent revolution. Such an action is unlikely to succeed, and even if it does, it would take a long time and cost a whole lot of lives.
That's all rather beside the point, though. Regardless of whether or not there exist ways to change the situation politically, the fact remains that BB cannot be relied upon to provide a secure communications channel.
They're unacceptable at first blush because the companies that produce them get audio recordings. Those companies aren't nearly trustworthy enough for that level of access.
That developers can access the recordings as well makes it a million times worse. As untrustworthy as the companies are, random app developers are even less so.
As long as this data is being sent somewhere else, these devices will not have a place in my home.
"Dead" means no longer sold or supported.
MS is a predator!
You sound surprised, but shouldn't be! Microsoft's history makes this clear, and if you're too young to remember it firsthand, it's easily discoverable.
BB was always about security and still is.
Well, it was, until BB decided it was OK to weaken security in exchange for being allowed to continue to sell phones in certain markets. That basically eliminated the only reason to use BB phones.
I remember WinCE. It was truly horrible.
In fairness to Microsoft, Apple didn't understand the importance of apps at first either. They didn't even allow third parties to create them. In terms of apps, the difference between Apple and Microsoft is that Apple figured out and adapted to the reality of the business rather quickly.