having EME available and *you* as a developer not using them is exactly the same as EME not being standardised and *you* not using them.
Nope. I will undoubtedly be forced to use EME modules, not as a developer but as an end user. Of course, this is a redundant standard.
The addition of EME to the spec in no way changes your position, whereas the lack of addition to the spec does affect another developers position.
No it doesn't. It just means they have to use the existing plugin APIs. Or they have to do the work themselves instead of pushing a chunk off on browser vendors.
Not including EME negatively affects other developers who want to use it, while including EME doesn't affect other developers who don't want to use it.
Not including EME while pursuing a no-plugins approach to the web reduces attack surface. Including EME while deprecating Flash will probably increase attack surface and help do little more than spread malware while simultaneously not increasing the availability of the material these technologies are supposed to "protect" from us evil, criminal bastards.
If you cannot see the difference between those positions, then you need to ask yourself why.
I see why EME as a concept is redundant and hazardous, and why I'll probably end up forced to use it or sites will break, just like the bad old days of IE6.
They seem intent on listening to a very, very tiny base when it comes to ramming EME through. Apparently what Hollywood wants is more important than what anyone else wants.
It's about choice. If the web does not have DRM then consumers can only use services like Netflix where Netflix deigns to create an app (plug-ins are on their way out). That will generally be the few dominant platforms.
It will be the same with this, because instead of having to compile their app for a platform they'll have to compile their EME module.
If DRM is a standardized part of the web then anyone with a standards compliant browser can access those services.
Unless they're on an unsupported platform.
their support of this standard suggests that they actually want me to be able to use their service on my Playbook.
I suspect you won't get Netflix on your Playbook unless Blackberry negotiates a licensing agreement with Netflix for their EME module.
I want the choice to be able to stray beyond the dominant platforms and still use Netflix.
And I sincerely doubt you will. This is about taking control, not granting you choice.
So you'll still need one plugin for Windows, one for OS X, one for iOS, one for Android, one for Windows RT, etc. (oh and none for Linux.) And then you'll have a multitude of others made by various and sundry companies of varying skill.
I expect that if this takes hold, malware will spread like never seen.
hey do so because they think it works well enough to raise their bottom line vs not doing it.
FTFY. DRM has not actually been proven to work in any situation. There is only supposition and failures like PlaysForSure and pains in the ass like HDCP.
I suspect the TV/Movie groups are still pissing themselves just like they did back when the VCR, that industry destroying invention, first appeared and ruined them. Oh wait...
How did you enter the BIOS on boot? Laptops that come with Windows 8 are configured for Fast Boot and will ignore any key presses and boot directly into the installed OS - Windows 8 - which will stonewall you until you accept their EULA.
Nobody knows who the fathers are, but the babies will be taken care of by their rich uncle, Uncle Sam (aka taxpayers). Free food, free medical care, free cell phone, free housing, free utilities, etc. ad nauseum.
I know, right? If they can't afford to pay for their own medical care, food, and housing they should just do without!
My belief is that anything over a month for mother or father is too much.
Get back on the treadmill! Your corporate masters demand your servitude!
as more GNU utilities, such as bash, gcc and so on have gone GPL3, they are like an albatross around Linux' neck, since a lot of companies don't want to touch that w/ a bargepole
DRM fetishists have a problem with license agreements that assert terms in favor of the end user. This does not surprise me.
ZFS-on-Linux
Is slow and will always be slow while running from user land.
Even things like BTRFS are neither GPL3 nor CDDL - they are GPL2.
While the card itself isn't linked to you by name and so can be passed around, wouldn't paying for the top-up require credit card or some other electronic funds transfer which could be linked to you (or someone close to you if they're topping it up)?
The Japanese, for instance, love cash. And when you top up a Suica card, it's done at the train station and they take bills directly, I have no idea if it's even possible to use a card.
It might be an inconvenience to take cash and put it on the card, but it's a nice air gap.
Not really. 2.4 didn't have an IPv6 stack last I recall. Combined with the fact that 2.4 and 3.3 have little in common (hell 2.6.0 and 2.6.39 had little in common) and 3.3 has way more in terms of features, I'm not surprised that 16MB of RAM was a little too constraining.
So the original device is being retired and the name lives on. If you're insistent, the Linksys WRT160NL and Linksys WRT350N v2 are supported still as they have 32MB of RAM each. But it's supported on such a wide array of other devices, I still don't see why this is any reason to throw up a fuss.
I don't know, 11 year old routers might be pretty uncommon. Hell, I'd suggest that it'd be a good time to upgrade. My Netgear WNDR-3700 has 64MB of RAM and 8MB of flash, so this will work fine for me. I'll be upgrading from 10.03.1 so the lack of an ancient, obsolete kernel like Linux 2.4 means nothing to me.
This is actually exceedingly unfair, and plays into the hands of the major corporations.
If I create a work, it has no inherent value out of the gate. If a major corporation comes along and sees it and figures that it's worth $5 million to them, they could easily lowball me and offer $1 million. Since my work now has a publicly known value, I owe taxes that I can't possibly afford. Now I'm forced to sell my work to a company who can easily make more for it.
If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all. For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.
Everyone who signs Microsoft's agreement and continues to use the Linux kernel is in violation of its license. As such, anyone who holds copyright on the code in the kernel could file suit.
Slashdot Mirror
Nope. I will undoubtedly be forced to use EME modules, not as a developer but as an end user. Of course, this is a redundant standard.
No it doesn't. It just means they have to use the existing plugin APIs. Or they have to do the work themselves instead of pushing a chunk off on browser vendors.
Not including EME while pursuing a no-plugins approach to the web reduces attack surface. Including EME while deprecating Flash will probably increase attack surface and help do little more than spread malware while simultaneously not increasing the availability of the material these technologies are supposed to "protect" from us evil, criminal bastards.
I see why EME as a concept is redundant and hazardous, and why I'll probably end up forced to use it or sites will break, just like the bad old days of IE6.
So it'll be cross platform, but only to platforms Netflix approves of.
I expect things to stay the same. Only now we'll have more CDMs than plugins, and more attack vectors to be concerned about.
They seem intent on listening to a very, very tiny base when it comes to ramming EME through. Apparently what Hollywood wants is more important than what anyone else wants.
It will be the same with this, because instead of having to compile their app for a platform they'll have to compile their EME module.
Unless they're on an unsupported platform.
I suspect you won't get Netflix on your Playbook unless Blackberry negotiates a licensing agreement with Netflix for their EME module.
And I sincerely doubt you will. This is about taking control, not granting you choice.
So you'll still need one plugin for Windows, one for OS X, one for iOS, one for Android, one for Windows RT, etc. (oh and none for Linux.) And then you'll have a multitude of others made by various and sundry companies of varying skill.
I expect that if this takes hold, malware will spread like never seen.
FTFY. DRM has not actually been proven to work in any situation. There is only supposition and failures like PlaysForSure and pains in the ass like HDCP.
I suspect the TV/Movie groups are still pissing themselves just like they did back when the VCR, that industry destroying invention, first appeared and ruined them. Oh wait...
This wasn't the case for my Zenbook. It ignored every key and I had to accept the EULA and tell Windows to reboot into the BIOS.
Do tell:
How did you enter the BIOS on boot? Laptops that come with Windows 8 are configured for Fast Boot and will ignore any key presses and boot directly into the installed OS - Windows 8 - which will stonewall you until you accept their EULA.
Straw polls.
I know, right? If they can't afford to pay for their own medical care, food, and housing they should just do without!
Get back on the treadmill! Your corporate masters demand your servitude!
DRM fetishists have a problem with license agreements that assert terms in favor of the end user. This does not surprise me.
Is slow and will always be slow while running from user land.
It has to be, it's part of the Linux kernel.
Only in the Apple and Microsoft worlds, and even there only in mobile. And that's DRM too, so it's not easing off but ramping it up.
Sure you can, it just has to be power you like.
The Japanese, for instance, love cash. And when you top up a Suica card, it's done at the train station and they take bills directly, I have no idea if it's even possible to use a card.
It might be an inconvenience to take cash and put it on the card, but it's a nice air gap.
Normal? Relative to what standard?
He isn't credited with creating the internet. He's credited with creating the WWW.
I don't see how those old systems suddenly became useless. And not everyone feels compelled to stay on ancient kernels with crusty, old hardware.
Not really. 2.4 didn't have an IPv6 stack last I recall. Combined with the fact that 2.4 and 3.3 have little in common (hell 2.6.0 and 2.6.39 had little in common) and 3.3 has way more in terms of features, I'm not surprised that 16MB of RAM was a little too constraining.
So the original device is being retired and the name lives on. If you're insistent, the Linksys WRT160NL and Linksys WRT350N v2 are supported still as they have 32MB of RAM each. But it's supported on such a wide array of other devices, I still don't see why this is any reason to throw up a fuss.
I don't know, 11 year old routers might be pretty uncommon. Hell, I'd suggest that it'd be a good time to upgrade. My Netgear WNDR-3700 has 64MB of RAM and 8MB of flash, so this will work fine for me. I'll be upgrading from 10.03.1 so the lack of an ancient, obsolete kernel like Linux 2.4 means nothing to me.
But hey, the older images are still there.
What a completely ridiculous comment.
That seems positively ripe for abuse.
This is actually exceedingly unfair, and plays into the hands of the major corporations.
If I create a work, it has no inherent value out of the gate. If a major corporation comes along and sees it and figures that it's worth $5 million to them, they could easily lowball me and offer $1 million. Since my work now has a publicly known value, I owe taxes that I can't possibly afford. Now I'm forced to sell my work to a company who can easily make more for it.
GPLv2 section 7:
Everyone who signs Microsoft's agreement and continues to use the Linux kernel is in violation of its license. As such, anyone who holds copyright on the code in the kernel could file suit.
It doesn't specify anything of the sort. It specifies the interface, but not any specific CDM.