181–190 of 205 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is an argument against DRM.
You don't want to view this content?
Decrentralizing the web's software isn't good enough. We need to decentralize the hardware. Right now, connections to the web look like a tree, where a whole bunch of connections get funneled through an ISP. That ISP has the power. The power to throttle, the power to block, the power to record. And that ISP can be pressured by other powers. We need to decentralize so that instead of looking like a hierarchical tree,…
Where I live at least, nearly everyone has a wireless router, which hardware-wise should have no trouble talking to other wireless routers in nearby buildings. Often, there are even multiple wireless routers in the same building, which can't talk to each other except through the ISPs, which I find quite ridiculous. So, in urban areas of the US at least, it really is just a matter of software. Of course, a large scale…
Seriously, why prevent people from using a network? If you're relying on WPA for security then you shouldn't be connecting to the Internet in the first place. The most common thing I hear when guests see that my WiFi is open is that people will 'steal the bandwidth', as if the local exchange will magically run faster if there are enough residences connected to it! Also, given the monopoly position of phone provider, getting everyone to throw more money at them for the privilege of having multiple overlapping, mutually-exclusive networks is not a good plan.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
given the years of covert actions slowly coming to light, this is changing. I'm not just talking about relationships with 3-letter agencies but also actions like colluding to push down developer salaries, black-boxing their search algorithms, suddenly blacklisting competitors in their search rankings (e.g. Rap Genius), WiFi and Streeview privacy invasion, etc... How many times have they already faced Antitrust accusa…
A lot of that is a tempest in a teapot. Rap Genius was blacklisted for good reasons, they were clearly gaming the system using blackhat SEO techniques. Antitrust accusations? You mean those funded by Microsoft astroturf lobbying groups? And just listen to your other complaint: Google is the face of rich privileged techies, and at the same time, their uncool for theoretically pushing down salaries, and these already h…
Becoming anti-privacy, pro-DRM, and against net neutrality are much more significant betrayals.
The reason Apple doesn't get such a backlash is that they haven't represented themselves as morally superior. Everyone knows Steve Jobs was a ruthless businessman, and that Apple is not a philanthropic organization.
Perfect timing, I just released a tool that enabled a more decentralized web. It used BitTorrent Sync to distribute files and I plan on implementing namecoin or colored coins for name resolution. As soon as an open source, stable btsync clone is released I plan on swapping it in. The biggest drawback is that you can only serve static content, although I think many websites today would be fine with this restriction. Y…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>You know, the speed at which SPDY has caught on has given me hope. Admittedly, that's at the application layer, but I think if Google were to get behind an initiative to create a better TCP, it would actually have a chance at working. You might find QUIC interesting (being implemented on chrome): http://blog.chromium.org/2013/06/experimenting-with-quic.htm... The "SPDY" application layer its implemented on top of it…
Oh, thank you. I hadn't heard of QUIC. It's tunneled through UDP...does that mean it's NAT-friendly? Presumably so.
Not as NAT friendly as you might think. There's a fair bit of discussion in the QUIC design document[0] around how NATs screw up the protocol and how to mitigate the problem.
[0] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RNHkx_VvKWyWg6Lr8SZ-saqs...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I partially agree with you in the sense that we don't need new network with p2p or self-hosted solutions, but need stable distributed applications. How? I cannot agree with you to realize it via data redundancy and replication. The way you mentioned is just what Google is doing right now, which is not true distributed computing. Google's architecture relies on replicating services across many different machines to ac…
As far as i'm aware there's no such thing as "true" or "real" distributed computing. It's a wide field of study with many different overlapping concepts. The paper you linked to does describe how queries are resolved by Google, and not quite the whole picture required for a typical distributed computing model. But to say it's not distributed computing is... confusing. Clearly they must support this model over many si…
A good reference could be from Wikipedia: a distributed system is a software system in which components located on networked computers communicate and coordinate their actions by passing messages. The components interact with each other in order to achieve a common goal.
You can find from the blog page here about distributed computing: http://bit.ly/1jkySqU
Perfect timing, I just released a tool that enabled a more decentralized web. It used BitTorrent Sync to distribute files and I plan on implementing namecoin or colored coins for name resolution. As soon as an open source, stable btsync clone is released I plan on swapping it in. The biggest drawback is that you can only serve static content, although I think many websites today would be fine with this restriction. Y…
While i love your idea, (and am glad you found the context to show your project off again. i read the original post), i do have two nitpicks. You said it downloads the entire site when i open a site. Now, this is completely fine for normal text-based blogs, but what if it's an image heavy site? Like theChive? Wouldn't i end up storing several gigabits (possibly terrabytes) of data for that site? Secondly, if somehow…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If "standards compliant" means implementing every feature then no new (or existing) browser will ever be standards complaint anyways. This is not a lever that can be used to force everyone to implement DRM.
But any agreed upon public standard should be implementable by any vendor. DRM extensions do not fit this bill. If only a select few can implement it, then why call it a standard?
The standard (that is being proposed) in this case is an interface that the actual DRM modules hook into. Anyone can implement the interface.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And that's fine. If they want DRM they should write a proprietary app or plugin. But we shouldn't turn the web into a proprietary app controlled by Microsoft, Google, and Apple.
I would rather have a seamless experience in the browser than having to switch to native apps all the time. The web is a proprietary app controlled by the w3c, who are mainly Microsoft, Google and Apple. You can believe it's an open platform, but if that's the case it should be easy for you to block DRM ;) Good luck
The web is not proprietary, not an app, and only to some extend controlled by the w3c, which is much more than Microsoft, Google, and Apple.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They don't need DRM. DRM does not work. Just go to pirate bay and you'll find every TV series, movie (with DVD/BluRay/Stream release), album immediately after their release. They think they need DRM. But in reality they don't. It doesn't stop piracy at all. It's a burden only to their legal customers and not to the pirates. It is all about easy and affordable access. If a company insists on using DRM then they should…
It stops plenty of piracy as without it piracy could be as easy as a single click from a place like Netflix, Google Music, etc. Just because it's easy for you to circumvent doesn't mean it's easy for the everyday user. But totally agreed that it doesn't belong in web standards.
It... actually is already at this point. I can find any song, any TV show, and any film, available to stream instantly on Youtube of all places. This isn't a shady torrent site, it's a Google-owned property.
In the music sphere, Grooveshark has every song you could think of, and is claimed to fail to comply with the licensing requirements of the copyright owners, and is thus being sued over it.
There is little or no reason that a similar service could not pop up for video, aside from the fact that bandwidth is costly, and I'm sure that could be resolved to an extent through some form of torrent-over-WebRTC system.