/tech/ - Technology★

Did you know that the W3C does not put DRM into HTML? All it does is provide an API for websites to interface.

>This specification does not define a content protection or Digital Rights Management system. Rather, it defines a common API that may be used to discover, select and interact with such systems as well as with simpler content encryption systems. Implementation of Digital Rights Management is not required for compliance with this specification: only the Clear Key system is required to be implemented as a common baseline.

>post on twitter

>get banned for wrong opinions

>post video on youtube

>get banned for posting wrong opinions

>post comment on facebook

>get banned for posting wrong opinions

>post on reddit

>get banned for posting wrong opinion

>b-but muh DRM

the EFF is a joke.

>>829496

>The Paciello Group

>Your Accessibility Partner. We help achieve end-to-end accessibility in your organization's websites, applications and processes.

What does accessibility have anything to do with DRM?

captcha: robkat

We alrady knew W3C is pozzed, and it was just a matter of time until they force DRM. The only question is how will open-source web browsers manage to implement this. Maybe there's a public key crypto component with code that runs in botnet cpu? That would mean future of web is 100% botnet, and this is how they make sure you aren't running open hardware. Pretty sneaky, but it sounds like something the kikes would do.

I've read somewhere that putting any cryptography into user-side javascript is bad.

Wait till someone breaks it in few months.

>>829522

This scenario is covered in the article, mate.

>Which is where the law comes in. DRM law gives rightsholders more forceful, far-ranging legal powers than laws governing any other kind of technology. In 1998, Congress passed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), whose Section 1201 provides for felony liability for anyone commercially engaged in bypassing a DRM system: 5 years in prison and a $500,000 fine for a first offense. Even noncommercial bypass of DRM is subject to liability. It also makes it legally risky to even talk about how to bypass a DRM system.

>So the law shores up DRM systems with a broad range of threats. If Netflix designs a video player that won't save a video unless you break some DRM, they now have the right to sue -- or sic the police -- on any rival that rolls out an improved alternative streaming client, or a video-recorder that works with Netflix. Such tools wouldn't violate copyright law any more than a VCR or a Tivo does, but because that recorder would have to break Netflix DRM, they could use DRM law to crush it.

>>829523

>CSS & Co. have never been broken

Good to see you back agent Fud

Break-up silicone valley. Use the club of monopoly busting that broke up ma bell and the oil companies in the 19th century.

Stop watching (((Hollywood))) trash, don't buy movies, cds or any other fucking jew media. Stop paying for services like Netflix; stop using browsers that implement DRM.

The most power people have in this society to-day is to vote with their wallet. Make it fucking happen.

Better youtube-dl any/everything you can, while you can. Soon just downloading will be worthless w/o the goodthink-approved keys from big bro.

>>829500 (checked)

If they work for the company, their interests are going to align with their employer's interest naturally. How many people are honest enough to work themselves out of job, knowing that it is the responsible thing to do?

>>829496

Microsoft again? When will these retards stop?

>microsoft (tm) UEFI and obtaining all signed keys for literally backdooring anyone anywhere

>html 5.1

I know they're trying to be a service provider but this is fucking ridiculous and had gone to far

>But now that apps exist and nearly everyone uses them, big companies can boycott the web

Are there really any big-name apps that are worth using in this scenario? All I can think of is Jewtube

>>829566

Google's applications, social medias, netflix

Most of /tech/'s userbase probably lives without those, but the mass cannot. The average person would download an app for each website instead of just using their web browser, which usually is faster and can block ads.

This is just untrue. DRM has always existed on the web. Ten years ago it was Flash and Silverlight, two years ago companies would put proprietary blobs into browsers to play their shit (Chrome and Edge being the worst offenders) and now the W3C gave an standard that websites can interface with to apply DRM.

Is DRM bad? Yes. Did companies lobby inside the W3C to force the standard? Yes. Is it a better solution than proprietary extensions and NPAPI plugins? Also yes.

DRM only exists thanks to retarded US laws anyway, so the real culprit here is; surprise, companies being allowed to lobby in Congress.

>>829497

>be purposely edgy and/or stupid enough to believe the bullshit from an imageboard named "politically incorrect" (which basically means all the content there is purposely edgy)

<w-w-why doesn't the rest of society accept my retarded, edgy "opinions" 😢

Hang yourself.

Does it have any real practical value and is not another jewish maindwashing brain bubblegum if it has DRM applied on it?

All truly valuable information is distributed without restrictions and even free of charge.

Really makes you think.

>>829500

>What are you talking about?

You know exactly what he is talking about you slippery kike. Stop pretending to be even dumber than you already are.

>>829588

Bashing /pol/ again today Moshe? Even your dubs disagree with you.

>>829520

>end up

Like it was not the goal of the trip.

Being able to tardwrangle niggercattle is important for both us and the jews and all but is there even a single good or entertaining thing that you can do on an app with drm, or a website with drm?

>>829510

>The only question is how will open-source web browsers manage to implement this

They are not forced to implement it.

I will use browsers which didn't implement it (or made it possible to rip it out at compile time), and if at some time the web is unusable without DRM, then fuck this shit, I'm out.

(btw, posting from Firefox EME-free edition)

>>829644

Firefox runs EME inside a sandbox. If you disable EME from the GUI, then no EME code is ever run at all.

It's not necessary to use the EME-free version of Firefox.

>>829481 (OP)

>apps are gonna kill da web!

Good, the Web is supposed to be for easy access to information in the form of HTML documents and not a one-stop-shop software development platform.

>>829497

>I should be allowed to post anything I want using other people's servers for free

>>829655

This, they should have encouraged this kikery to go full proprietary and leave the web entirely. Step 1 of chemo.

>>829644

>>829646

Firefox doesn't even implement EME at all. If you want to run EME inside Firefox, you must first install a third party EME plugin. When you run EME with that plugin, Firefox will run that inside a sandbox.

>>829718

back to r/firefox

>>829722

check out the r/dubs

>>829496

Notice also how Microsoft's name was conspicuously absent from the WHATWG, where all the real work on HTML5 was done for almost fifteen years between every other browser maker on the web. They showed up at the end under the W3C's disguise and came up with that shitty angular-logo marketing campaign, which was purely to advertise IE9's great new "HTML 5" support.

They also appeared on the WHATWG mailing lists around that time doing nothing but being arrogant nitpicking dickweeds, probably solely to prevent people pointing out they had literally no other participation in the standards process whatsoever.

DRM in HTML5 is a victory for the open Web, not a defeat

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/03/drm-in-html5-is-a-victory-for-the-open-web-not-a-defeat/

>>829745

But the claim is disingenuous when used as an argument against DRM. Deprived of the ability to use browser plugins, protected content distributors are not, in general, switching to unprotected media. Instead, they're switching away from the Web entirely. Want to send DRM-protected video to an iPhone? "There's an app for that." Native applications on iOS, Android, Windows Phone, and Windows 8 can all implement DRM, with some platforms, such as Android and Windows 8, even offering various APIs and features to assist this.

In other words, the alternative to using DRM in browser plugins on the Web is not "abandoning DRM;" it's "abandoning the Web."

It's hard to see how this is in the Web's best interest. Mozilla, in particular, is fighting this very outcome. The underlying justification for its development of the Firefox OS smartphone platform is that it wants to ensure that the Web itself is the application platform and that software and services aren't locked away in a series of proprietary, platform-specific apps.

And yet it's precisely this outcome that opposition to EME will produce.

>>829497

You need to say whatever you can like Tim Berners Lee when he said he was against DRM. His social currency went through the roof. Nobody cared that he did the opposite. It's all about appearance.

>>829532

Agreed, but you know we won't make a difference, right? Tell cattle their computers have a backdoor and they shouldn't accept it. "I don't have anything to hide", they'll say. Tell cattle their cute AI personal whatever is a spy phoning home and sending their personal life details to companies, they'll say "it's to better understand my needs". Tell cattle there's forbidden subjects and they can only talk about approved ones, they'll say "great, it was about time". Keep them entertained and numb by a fake sense of participation, and you can push any bullshit.

>>829497

>>829901

It's amazing that people can become so thoroughly corrupted.

Considering the EFF originally formed out of sheer happenstance from a federal raid on some proto-/tg/ fags in the early '90s, one can only hope us imageboard types will eventually organize something to replace it instead of being such autistic anarchists.

>>829747

You must be joking.

Platform-specific applications is how EVERYTHING should be handled. Javascript was a mistake. I don't need 50 different web sites employing newgrad idiots reinventing the wheel for UIs and video players. Fucking dumbest thing ever.

>>829907

That's the problem, what's being born from the appstore walled garden soup isn't new standards along the lines of SMTP/POP/IMAP, IRC, FTP, NNTP, Gopher, etc. Instead, everybody is making closed APIs that are all mutually incompatible with each other, and even the somewhat open standards (Skype, Youtube) are dropping or crippling their public APIs.

>>829747

The web is already mostly dead and DRM isn't going to make a difference either way. It's a miserable experience on mobile so people use apps. Without realizing it, the percentage of their internet use that goes through a browser has dropped so low that many are only using browsers at work. It's getting close to a point where if you killswitched all browsers most people wouldn't notice.

>>829481 (OP)

>If you find a security issue in their DRM, you will be sued/jailed.

I doubt they'd do this, there's no way to prevent people from disclosing. Some fags will find vulns and then post 'em anyway.

>>829522

Chris Fischer is a literal cuck but he was right in this case.

>>830333

bringing up Israel and their bullshit isn't really /pol/ posting tbh

>>829481 (OP)

There is a more insidious reason for DRM, think of all the leaked videos and such that various parties dislike. If "content production devices" like cameras and phone cams produce DRM-laden content, and "content consumption devices" like computers won't play unauthorized content, there's instant automatic censorship for you.

Save those older devices folks, I would even suggest that people start hunting down older analog-format gadgets just to have in reserve in case a samidaz effort is necessary.

Quick guide to avoiding DRM:

>if you must buy media, buy media on DRM-broken formats like DVD or buy pre-DRM format media like LDs and VHS or CDs

>don't buy apps through app stores, prefer physical media if you need proprietary software

>use free software

>acquire devices which don't have built in support for DRM, this means avoiding HDMI and Toslink and so on, DVI or VGA or analog wins

>check out media from your library if you need to watch it

>prepare an analog hole, or buy professional equipment much of which ignores DRM

>>830333

>>830367

8ch is the new polchan now.

>>829772

>that start menu

you have a long way to go anon

>>829747

>In other words, the alternative to using DRM in browser plugins on the Web is not "abandoning DRM;" it's "abandoning the Web."

How is that a bad thing?

The web free from all the kikery?

I see it as obvious net win.

>>829907

>reinventing the wheel for UIs and video players

this is exactly the kind of shit which is done in proprietary software. and when it runs outside of a browser, it's mostly not sandboxed.

anyway, kikes will do botnet software, the important thing is to have some alternative to not be forced to use the kike software.

>>830396

>prefer physical media if you need proprietary software

That's a funny way of spelling word "torrents"

>>831024

>torrents will always be available

>the internet can't be turned off in effect

If you don't want to buy software (it's available used for cheap mostly these days if you're willing to go back a few years) then at least burn your torrented warez. You never know when they'll flip the magic bit and turn off modern post-Management Engine PCs.

>>829584

>DRM has always existed on the web

I think this is different though. I don't think reverse-engineering Flash was ever a crime; gnash is developed openly by GNU, for example. But the DMCA means that circumventing DRM is a crime with a hefty punishment, which in turn means that there is now a part of your browser which you cannot legally do security research on. Then again, as has been shown with DVDCSS and the Blu-ray keys, people will break it and release it. Even ESR has the DVD and Blu-ray keys on his personal website and no-one gives a shit.

>>831069

So disable it! Firefox doesn't have this by default. If you're using Chrome, then that's your fault.

>>829636

>calls others SJWs while getting triggered by any opinion right of Obama

Wew

>>830431

It always was, it's just now there's faggots coming in and poking us saying "do Nazi things". Ok, I tell a lie, /pol/ was falseflagged to hell on /tech/ with "lincucks is gommunism" retardation, especially considering fucking Hitler himself built the Prora, the greatest example of the public commons known to man. /tech/ being naive as fuck ate it up . Plus now we have actual cuckchanners like the above who come here to fight the ebil Nazis to give meaning to their miserable materialistic lives.