I noted your "(relatively)." I disagree with the usage. I believe a coin made from lead that has been soaked in extra-sticky yellow paint is not (relatively) closer to being a coin made from gold than is a coin soaked in extra-degradable yellow paint, and I suspect you'd agree. Lead cannot be turned to gold by chemical or mechanical processes, full stop. No chemical or mechanical process makes lead "relatively" more golden than any other.
DRM can make it very inconvenient and very onerous for A to send a message to B, but it can never secure that message against interception by C where B and C are the same person. Telling worried rights-holders that one protocol is "less insecure", when security is impossible under all protocols, is a way to prey upon those worries and can be profitable, but never correct.
The task is "allow A to send a message to B such that B can read it, but C cannot."
Under DRM, B and C are the same person.
Q.E.D.
The claim that a process will allow a customer to manage digital rights are akin to claims that a chemical process will allow a customer to change lead to gold. They are the claims of a fool, a charlatan, a newborn, or someone desperate. Or a devil's advocate.
But the state didn't give it a monopoly on operating systems. It gave it a monopoly on the Windows code The state gave a monopoly on Windows-compatible implementations by using force to
prevent reverse-engineering
prevent anyone with an application from bundling the binaries required by that application
prevent anyone from setting up an alternative distribution
And yet Microsoft was and is a monopoly without that happening. Microsoft's monopoly rests on the state's enforcement of its copyrights. State power gives Microsoft sole-legitimate-supplier status in the developed world.
The hard part of shorting is predicting when, because you can only short a stock for a limited period of time.
You can only short it until you go broke, if that's what you mean. But if Alioth's view that the stock's price is a "hyperinflated bubble," then how could he go broke shorting it? Perhaps his view is unchanged since Google originally came to market at 77, a price derided as a "bubble" at the time, and he plans to cash in once Google returns to single digits.
The entire point of the project is to make information available to the most people possible for free. The goals in the mission statement should be separated.
Wikimedia Foundation is dedicated to the development and maintenance of online free, open content encyclopedias, collections of quotations, textbooks and other collections of documents, information, and other informational databases in all the languages of the world that will be distributed free of charge to the public The goals should be made distinct:
Development of informational databases
Maintenance of informational databases
Distribution to the public free of restrictions
Distribution to the public free of charge
Enact user fees to cover "distribution to the public free of restrictions." Use donations to cover the other three. Everyone with an account is a potential contributor.
At current prices, providing everyone on Earth with as little as one gigabyte of content per year would require annual donations in excess of one billion US$. Current prices arise from current technology. The goal of free-as-in-beer distribution could possilby be addressed by improvements in distribution efficiency.
Amazon's Simple Storage Service (S3) prices bandwidth at $0.20 per gigabyte. Host Wikipedia on S3, and write some glue code so that people can have Wikipedia browsing accounts which are billed by Amazon. People who cannot have an account due to being minors or developing-country-dwellers can perhaps have their fees paid by a charitable foundation. Storage is $1.80 per gigabyte per year from Amazon, so if Wikipedia is a terabyte, it's under $2,000 per year. How big is it?
AACS took years to develop, and it has been broken in weeks. The developers spent billions, the hackers spent pennies.
For DRM to work, it has to be airtight. There can't be a single mistake. It's like a balloon that pops with the first prick. That means that every single product from every single vendor has to perfectly hide their keys, perfectly implement their code. There can't be a single way to get into the guts of the code to retrieve the cleartext or the keys while it's playing back. All attackers need is a single mistake that they can use to compromise the system.
There is no future in which bits will get harder to copy. Instead of spending billions on technologies that attack paying customers, the studios should be confronting that reality and figuring out how to make a living in a world where copying will get easier and easier. They're like blacksmiths meeting to figure out how to protect the horseshoe racket by sabotaging railroads.
The railroad is coming. The tracks have been laid right through the studio gates. It's time to get out of the horseshoe business.
I am currently undecided, a fact for which my Christian friends tell me I am undoubtedly going to hell for.
Explain to them that it is they who are bound for Hell because for mocking John 20:25, and that you hope to observe their endless, relentless torture, consider it sweet, and pray that the fires be made hotter and their torment ever more severe.
The "God" entity is more complex than the universe, correct? So however improbable you think it is that the universe "fell into place just right," it is necessarily more improbable that God "fell into place just right."
Perpetual motion machines can be done well or ill, too, but they all fail to achieve "motion in perpetuity." Ignoring the "analog hole" for DRM is akin to ignoring the "you need to keep replacing the batteries hole" for perpetual motion machines.
The "analog hole" is unavoidable, because the consumer's sense organs are analog.
Do these questions mean that you do not agree that DRM is fundamentally flawed? Do you believe "the average Joe won't attempt to decrypt a message" is an adequate defense?
"Apple cannot license FairPlay to others, says Mr Jobs, because it would depend on them to produce security fixes promptly."
Insecurity of the DRM technique is a side issue. Whether or not the technique is robust, the requirement that any flaws be patched throughout the FairPlay world in two weeks precludes is a powerful argument against licensing.
You have been answered twice already, but I cannot resist telling you again.
Cryptography is used so that a message from A can be read by B but not by C. With DRM, B and C are the same person.
The message from A (the publisher) must be readable by B (the consumer) but not by C (the consumer).
I hope you understand now why DRM is a concept flawed in its fundament.
DRM would be useful. So would a perpetual motion machine. It is wishful thinking to believe that the sheer utility of a function means it is capable of being produced.
Because the device is separate from your cellphone, a "hard drive crash on your cellphone" is prevented by design. The device is a peripheral. Your cellphone OS should be able to tolerate the failure of a peripheral.
The device is a storage peripheral for mobile devices.
You grossly misunderstood the article. The novelty is not "small hard drive." The novelty is "20G hard drive with its own Bluetooth and WiFi radios and battery."
Thanks sincerely for the walkthrough. Any hints on how to get the door to open? I've waved the key all over, but it just keeps jumping back to the chimes.
Slashdot Mirror
I noted your "(relatively)." I disagree with the usage. I believe a coin made from lead that has been soaked in extra-sticky yellow paint is not (relatively) closer to being a coin made from gold than is a coin soaked in extra-degradable yellow paint, and I suspect you'd agree. Lead cannot be turned to gold by chemical or mechanical processes, full stop. No chemical or mechanical process makes lead "relatively" more golden than any other.
DRM can make it very inconvenient and very onerous for A to send a message to B, but it can never secure that message against interception by C where B and C are the same person. Telling worried rights-holders that one protocol is "less insecure", when security is impossible under all protocols, is a way to prey upon those worries and can be profitable, but never correct.
You are mistaken. DRM cannot be secure.
The task is "allow A to send a message to B such that B can read it, but C cannot."
Under DRM, B and C are the same person.
Q.E.D.
The claim that a process will allow a customer to manage digital rights are akin to claims that a chemical process will allow a customer to change lead to gold. They are the claims of a fool, a charlatan, a newborn, or someone desperate. Or a devil's advocate.
You are mistaken. Your score benefits from your regular payments, even if your payment is the full balance.
Will this make it harder for Ebaum's World to misattribute content?
You can only short it until you go broke, if that's what you mean. But if Alioth's view that the stock's price is a "hyperinflated bubble," then how could he go broke shorting it? Perhaps his view is unchanged since Google originally came to market at 77, a price derided as a "bubble" at the time, and he plans to cash in once Google returns to single digits.
Are you short the stock, then?
Do you know where I could find the answer to two questions:
What is Wikipedia's monthly bandwidth?
What is Wikipedia's storage?
Development of informational databases
Maintenance of informational databases
Distribution to the public free of restrictions
Distribution to the public free of charge
Enact user fees to cover "distribution to the public free of restrictions." Use donations to cover the other three. Everyone with an account is a potential contributor.
At current prices, providing everyone on Earth with as little as one gigabyte of content per year would require annual donations in excess of one billion US$. Current prices arise from current technology. The goal of free-as-in-beer distribution could possilby be addressed by improvements in distribution efficiency.
Amazon's Simple Storage Service (S3) prices bandwidth at $0.20 per gigabyte. Host Wikipedia on S3, and write some glue code so that people can have Wikipedia browsing accounts which are billed by Amazon. People who cannot have an account due to being minors or developing-country-dwellers can perhaps have their fees paid by a charitable foundation. Storage is $1.80 per gigabyte per year from Amazon, so if Wikipedia is a terabyte, it's under $2,000 per year. How big is it?
There is no commentary whatsoever. The video is comprised entirely of quotes from an English translation of the Koran.
The "God" entity is more complex than the universe, correct? So however improbable you think it is that the universe "fell into place just right," it is necessarily more improbable that God "fell into place just right."
Perpetual motion machines can be done well or ill, too, but they all fail to achieve "motion in perpetuity." Ignoring the "analog hole" for DRM is akin to ignoring the "you need to keep replacing the batteries hole" for perpetual motion machines.
The "analog hole" is unavoidable, because the consumer's sense organs are analog.
I agree with him, if his position is "DRM is a pain in everyone's ass." That DRM is fundamentally flawed sharpens the pain.
Do these questions mean that you do not agree that DRM is fundamentally flawed? Do you believe "the average Joe won't attempt to decrypt a message" is an adequate defense?
Too bad you didn't read the article.
Jobs' argument against licensing is:
"Apple cannot license FairPlay to others, says Mr Jobs, because it would depend on them to produce security fixes promptly."
Insecurity of the DRM technique is a side issue. Whether or not the technique is robust, the requirement that any flaws be patched throughout the FairPlay world in two weeks precludes is a powerful argument against licensing.
You have been answered twice already, but I cannot resist telling you again.
Cryptography is used so that a message from A can be read by B but not by C. With DRM, B and C are the same person.
The message from A (the publisher) must be readable by B (the consumer) but not by C (the consumer).
I hope you understand now why DRM is a concept flawed in its fundament.
DRM would be useful. So would a perpetual motion machine. It is wishful thinking to believe that the sheer utility of a function means it is capable of being produced.
I was enjoying DROD, but there is no way to bypass levels, and after a week seeing the same old puzzle, I lost interest.
Because the device is separate from your cellphone, a "hard drive crash on your cellphone" is prevented by design. The device is a peripheral. Your cellphone OS should be able to tolerate the failure of a peripheral.
The device is a storage peripheral for mobile devices.
This device has its own WiFi and Bluetooth radios. No carrier charges apply.
You grossly misunderstood the article. The novelty is not "small hard drive." The novelty is "20G hard drive with its own Bluetooth and WiFi radios and battery."
Thanks sincerely for the walkthrough. Any hints on how to get the door to open? I've waved the key all over, but it just keeps jumping back to the chimes.