Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mozilla Launches a New Firefox Version Without DRM Support

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 220 posts

Re: Mozilla Launches a New Firefox Version Without DRM Support

#171

Post by byuu »

notsony wrote: post #163
byuu wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ridiculous! He was hounded out, forced to resign and you damn well know it. https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/04/05/faq-on-ceo-resignat... "On April 3, 2014 Brendan Eich voluntarily stepped down as CEO of Mozilla." (I'm not going to, but) I can tell you to stop posting on HN every single day of the year indefinitely. But I can't make you. I don't have that power. If you choose to, it's your choice . Eich was not f…

This is madness. Have you ever heard of constructive dismissal? California Supreme Court: "the employer either intentionally created or knowingly permitted working conditions that were so intolerable or aggravated at the time of the employee's resignation that a reasonable employer would realize that a reasonable person in the employee's position would be compelled to resign" Wikipedia: "In employment law, constructi…

Tell me again how Eich's employer made it a hostile working environment for him, please?

Given that he had no boss (being the CEO and all), we can only assume you mean the board members. Please point out to me a single board member who was in any way hostile toward him.

Even the two board members that resigned said it had nothing to do with Eich.

Re: Mozilla Launches a New Firefox Version Without DRM Support

#172

Post by squidbidness »

bcheung wrote: post #53
schoen wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original commenter was asking why people would want to prevent their browser from having DRM support, rather than why publishers would want DRM. (For DRM opponents, having convenient and standardized DRM is worse in many ways because it is more likely to be adopted in more circumstances.)

I can't think of a good reason to deliberately remove it from your browser. Why would it be worse if more companies used DRM? I can think of some edge cases on obscure devices or if you are pirate but other than that it seems like legal users would be unaffected and not even notice it.

The insinuation that opposing DRM has mainly to do with wanting piracy to be easy is a common straw-man. There are many who oppose piracy who also oppose DRM, for very compelling reasons that aren't just limited to edge cases or using obscure devices. For such people, it would be worse if more companies used DRM because it would mean losing the fight against DRM. More and more people who don't care about the issue will be used to dealing with it, and it will be seen as harmless when it's more widespread and ordinary users aren't bothered by it. That is very disheartening to those of us who find DRM seriously threatening to the kinds of grass-roots technological and social innovations that make us so excited about the internet.

Re: Mozilla Launches a New Firefox Version Without DRM Support

#173

Post by squidbidness »

bcheung wrote: post #168
ptx wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it seems like legal users would be unaffected and not even notice it. Yes, just like Sony said in response to the rootkit scandal – "Most people don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?" DRM is a declaration from the publishers that they distrust you so much that they must be granted absolute control over your machine. You can't retain higher privileges over your own machine than they ha…

That highlights the need for standard DRM rather than having each company using their own code that runs on your computer. With a standard DRM solution, the only person you would need to trust is the browser vendor. This seems like a better alternative than having a company force you to use their DRM.

But that can cut both ways. If having DRM on a computer at all is offensive to a user, than having a standard DRM method can make it all the harder to avoid.

And I don't think it's a very strong argument that fewer companies rolling their own DRM will be such a great thing, and I'd be surprised if DRM opposers would be relieved that fewer companies are rolling their own DRM if it means its harder to avoid ANYONE putting DRM on their machine. It's like a choice between letting independent, small-time thieves into your home, or having the Mafia allowed to organize, with the blessing or apathy of the general community. The first may be a more dispersed, less coherent adversary, and it might be harder to be confident that their crimes are high quality. The second will act like they already own your house and that they are affording you the privilege of living their under their "protection". But at least with the first, when everyone's not already used to them owning the place and aren't intimidated into accepting them, you can rely on some widespread denunciation of the robbery.

Standardized, widespread DRM is much more like these companies and committees acting like they already own our computers, that how we use them and how we connect them to internet is a privilege we enjoy only at their direction.

Re: Mozilla Launches a New Firefox Version Without DRM Support

#174

Post by Karunamon »

angersock wrote: post #170
Karunamon wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I again challenge you to provide me with a single shred of evidence that in his 16 years at Mozilla Eich treated even one member of the LGBT community unfairly from his position of power. But again, we're not worried about Eich's impact on Mozilla, which was, as you say, positive. I don't think he did abuse his power or hurt anybody by his actions at Mozilla - at least not from the 90's to 08 which is when the first…

You're moving the goalposts here--you initially wanted to paint Eich as this evil bigot, and then when presented with the "Well, in 16 years, where's the proof", you hem and haw. Imagine you were a staunch socialist, and your boss is friendly, supportive, and competent. Then, she gets promoted to CEO. And you find out the CEO of your company donated massive bucks at a fundraising dinner for, say, Mitt Romney. What do…

I think I conceded that point in the previous post.

I think your example sucks, because as previously mentioned above, a person is not an issue. Donating to a guy and donating to a cause are two different things

you initially wanted to paint Eich as this evil bigot

With that, I am not participating further in this conversation. Either I am not communicating clearly, or you have some other reason for choosing to ignore things I've already covered. Either way, this is no longer constructive and we're both wasting our time.

Re: Mozilla Launches a New Firefox Version Without DRM Support

#175

Post by Karunamon »

angersock wrote: post #169
Karunamon wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You appear to have missed the last sentence. If you don't see the difference between donating to a politician who has an entire constellation of beliefs, and donating to a single purpose lobbying campaign, we've nothing further to discuss.

So, again, I tend to be charitable towards others. There are several other explanations for the donation: maybe he was drunk and did it on a dare, maybe he was bored, maybe he needed to spend the money to piss somebody off, maybe he actually does respect LGBT folks but believes that marriage should be clearly defined, maybe he wanted to force the issue because he found it so odious he wanted to see it properly overtu…

Any one of those explanations could have been offered when he was asked about the matter and it would have almost completely defused it.

That's what I'm trying to get through to you.

It's not just the donation.

It's not just the fact that he'd rather quit a CEO position rather than answer a direct question about it. (Which is pretty damning all by itself - but.)

It's not just the fact that he still hasn't addressed it.

It's all of those things taken together, that paint him in a very poor light. Every defense you can possibly come up with makes no sense in light of one of those three facts.

And on a more personal note, my charity for Mr. Eich ran out when he took a shot at me and a few million others and didn't even have the fortitude to own it or apologize for it. There it hangs in the air like the scent of rotting meat, unaddressed, maybe people hope it'll go away if it's ignored long enough. People have been killed, driven to suicide, and otherwise treated as second class citizens thanks to the lies of the organization he chose to directly support. (You should look at the ads sponsored by the Prop 8 people - they're really something else!)

My charity stops well short of that point.

Perhaps it's not rational to place someone in the same mental bucket as Cathy and Robertson and Phelps, especially since Eich actually had a positive impact on the world via JS and Mozilla, unlike a fast food magnate, a megachurch preacher, and a hate speech spewer.

Perhaps actions speak louder than words.

...Perhaps an apology would be a good start.

Re: Mozilla Launches a New Firefox Version Without DRM Support

#176

Post by shmerl »

bsder wrote: post #143

Actually, the best way to fight this would be to fund people to break the DRM blob. What better way to drive home the uselessness of DRM than to have zillions of people having an automatic plugin that bypasses DRM everywhere it runs?

DRM blob is probably already broken (and if not, it will be soon enough). Those who use DRM do it despite knowing that it's useless for preventing copying. So breaking that DRM won't help that. It's some kind of distortion of the mind, not the logical reasoning here. Of course there are those who use DRM for simply sinister control purposes (i.e. DMCA-1201 supporters and the like). Those wouldn't care even if you clearly show them that DRM has negative, not positive effect on reducing piracy.

Re: Mozilla Launches a New Firefox Version Without DRM Support

#177

Post by notsony »

byuu wrote: post #153
Karunamon wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

*most find offensive. It is possible for someone to be a brilliant technologist and an otherwise awful person. And before someone takes me to task for the words "awful person" - sorry, that's my evaluation of someone who'd rather lose their job than say sorry for the prejudice.

That's the only thing I respect him for. That he wasn't willing to lie about his position and say his views had changed. Because if he had, it would have knocked all the wind out of the opposition's sails. Yes, he's absolutely an awful, vile person who thinks he's better than other people and entitled to special rights. But at least he's not also a liar. What bothers me more is the way everyone perpetuates the lie th…

Please stop posting your nonsense that Brendan Eich voluntarily resigned. Everybody knows that he was forced out and to pretend otherwise is insulting to anybody reading.

Re: Mozilla Launches a New Firefox Version Without DRM Support

#178

Post by notsony »

andrepd wrote: post #128
Karunamon wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you foresee a negotiation with someone's core values progressing? There's a fundamental incompatibility there, not just something that can be talked and reasoned around. You personally, the guy typing the letters into this box, what do you think the outcome of such a "negotiation" would be if it were as successful as humanly possible? At the end of the day, Mozilla's entire mission statement is contrary to Eic…

There is nothing whatsoever in the Mozilla Foundation statement of values that is incompatible with whatever political stance Mr Eich had personally. Flushing such an important person out the door because you find his position bothersome is nothing short of repulsive. But I'm sure you know this already. If you still don't give a damn, it's because you firmly believe that anyone that doesn't share your values on such…

Thank you for speaking common sense.

Re: Mozilla Launches a New Firefox Version Without DRM Support

#179

Post by na85 »

slang800 wrote: post #165
forgottenpass wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that is just an iteration of a cat and mouse game. It doesn't matter if the technically-weak position can be overcome when it is used by parties with exponentially more money and legal power. Fighting this fight on technical grounds alone is a surefire way to accelerate the inevitability of locked down computing platforms that restrict what the owner is capable of.

Unless it's easier to break DRM than it is to build a new implementation... Then we're just causing the companies that invest in DRM to lose more money than the companies that respect freedom. I can't say from experience how difficult it is to break and implement the DRM used on the web, but if it's anything like the DRM used in videogames, it should be doable in a couple weeks (with enough motivation).

The end game is that DRM companies aggressively lobby government to pass laws making it illegal to circumvent a digital lock. Then if you are found to have bypassed their trivial code they throw the book at you.

No technical solution required.

Re: Mozilla Launches a New Firefox Version Without DRM Support

#180

Post by hoopd »

Karunamon wrote: post #130
hoopd wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The question is actually "Is it appropriate for someone who takes active steps to treat some people as undeserving of basic rights[1] to take the ultimate leadership role in a diversity focused company?" First, it's not a "diversity focused company" it's a company focused on building a Free and Open internet. Being socially inclusive in their internal culture is secondary. Moreover Eich's definition of inclusivity…

I again challenge you to provide me with a single shred of evidence that in his 16 years at Mozilla Eich treated even one member of the LGBT community unfairly from his position of power. But again, we're not worried about Eich's impact on Mozilla, which was, as you say, positive. I don't think he did abuse his power or hurt anybody by his actions at Mozilla - at least not from the 90's to 08 which is when the first…

Yes, I can handle working at a company where I think the CEO is a piece of crap because to me that's part of being an adult.

I've worked with people who endured things like metal holding their bones together because the people who managed them couldn't be bothered to look out for their safety. So do I care that somebody might have their feelings hurt by their CEO's social views? Not really, not when there's zero evidence he created a hostile or unfair workplace.

> and then you find out via the outrage machine that he's donating to groups whose /one and only/ reason for existing is to marginalize you.

This is just ridiculous, it's like you never took the time to understand why people supported Prop 8. They were afraid their churches would be forced to marry same-sex couples and when they expressed that fear they were called bigots so they sought legal protections. I'm not religious and I don't go around apologizing for them very often, but I think calling them bigots it's going too far.

Post reply on HN