471–480 of 632 posts
I also find the title to be rather sensational.. "I tried creating a web browser" ^ "Google blocked me" implies that Google blocked them from creating a web browser.. which is not the case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most of the above, with a couple caveats. For HDMI, specifically: A is true, as HDMI requires a pretty ugly IP core on an fpga or an asic to process or produce the phy. B is also true, as to sell a device with an HDMI port you have to join the group and pay fees. If you're just hacking stuff together for personal use I think you're A-okay here. C is true ONLY in the case of HDCP protected content, as that handshake d…
Also I'm pretty sure the hdcp private keys have been factored, so anyone can now make unauthorized but compatible devices.
DRM is just a huge pile of shit. I mean, if it would actually work I would say okay, at least we have a solution that everyone is somehow happy with. But instead we consumers just loose. To give a few examples: - When I want to watch movies on Amazon Prime Video, there are some movies I can't watch in HD, even if I paid for HD (so the movie obviously exists in HD; probably dependent on the rights holder). The problem…
[1]: https://medium.com/netflix-techblog/per-title-encode-optimiz...
Let's add the US Congress and the EU to the long list of parties to blame for the DRM situation. "Reverse engineering" software for the purposes of "circumventing" copyright is illegal. "Circumventing" is much more broadly defined than it should be. It's not just illegal to redistribute copyrighted material. That's the point of copyright and has been the case for a long time. It's also illegal to watch/consume conten…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If a single company can effectively decide whether a bunch of 3rd party sites that they don't control work on your browser, how is that any different? Because those third party sites choose to utilise closed software from that company. And Netflix doesn't only utilise Widevine as a DRM, it uses several different DRM systems, so Google don't have control over anything.
This. Netflix is buying security for their product by doing this. We may all think (know) DRM is dumb, but DRM is more than just about how hard it is to hack. Sure, everyone could in theory reverse engineer this stuff. But the point is that it's only legally protected as long as it's at least not trivial . Open sourcing would probably invalidate their legal defences against people downloading Netflix movies.
I highly doubt that. A ToS violation is still a ToS violation (in the case of Netflix, which is expressly a streaming service), and copyright infringement is still copyright infringement. The legal protection that's afforded to DRM itself is something that's literally only useful to you as a content holder if you're looking to abuse copyright and go far beyond what copyright law actually grants you! That's what makes the whole notion so problematic in the first place.
DRM is just a huge pile of shit. I mean, if it would actually work I would say okay, at least we have a solution that everyone is somehow happy with. But instead we consumers just loose. To give a few examples: - When I want to watch movies on Amazon Prime Video, there are some movies I can't watch in HD, even if I paid for HD (so the movie obviously exists in HD; probably dependent on the rights holder). The problem…
The Netflix issue isn't really DRM, it's just a way to minimize bandwidth[1]; they found HQ 720 encodes to be sufficient quality for most consumers. I personally find it lacking. [1]: https://medium.com/netflix-techblog/per-title-encode-optimiz...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is what pisses me off aboit ads and data consumption pay rates: if i am paying for “1GB” of data, then i should have full control over how that data gets consumed by the content i am accessing over that paid pipe. Period.
That's why I use Brave Browser, it blocks everything by default. Doesn't even download them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The government is propping up the companies because that's what the companies made happen. Your framing suggests that government did this on its own. It did not. The outsized ability of companies to influence the government is the core problem that must first be solved. It is the root of most people's gripes with the government.
[flagged]
DRM is just a huge pile of shit. I mean, if it would actually work I would say okay, at least we have a solution that everyone is somehow happy with. But instead we consumers just loose. To give a few examples: - When I want to watch movies on Amazon Prime Video, there are some movies I can't watch in HD, even if I paid for HD (so the movie obviously exists in HD; probably dependent on the rights holder). The problem…
The Netflix issue isn't really DRM, it's just a way to minimize bandwidth[1]; they found HQ 720 encodes to be sufficient quality for most consumers. I personally find it lacking. [1]: https://medium.com/netflix-techblog/per-title-encode-optimiz...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pretty soon web traffic will be decrypted and rendered via site specific web assembly blobs that will do everything in their power to defeat custom rendering. The modern web has just begun, and the powers that be are still grappling with its control. So we're still living in a comparative wild-west, but you can see the writing on the wall in every direction you look online right now.
We ahould be doing exactly this in opposite: Anti ad exit node proxies. Basically an ecryoted proxy connection to a powerful ad stripping instance that will randomize and pipe all that shit to dev null, and reply to trackers with addesses of their competing ad systems. So that every ad for “microsoft” appears as though its being used by apple users...