Its the end of Online anonimity as we know it.
September 10, 2002 10:15 AM Subscribe
Its the end of Online anonimity as we know it. Intel announces that its next generation of CPUs will have Digital Rights Management hardwired onboard the chip. See also Microsoft's Palladium, an OS-level identity and rights management scheme.
(is this Wintel's idea of how to jump start anemic computer sales?)
well, i think it should give AMD/Lindows et al a real boost, actually.
posted by dash_slot- at 10:27 AM on September 10, 2002
posted by dash_slot- at 10:27 AM on September 10, 2002
It's been gratifying recently to see many high-profile switches to Linux, as well as serious consideration of it here at work.
Intel should be learning from MS's recent mistakes, not falling in line.
posted by frykitty at 10:31 AM on September 10, 2002
Intel should be learning from MS's recent mistakes, not falling in line.
posted by frykitty at 10:31 AM on September 10, 2002
i wouldn't count on AMD, people....they've already been involved in design discussions to make sure that Palladium would work with their processor architecture, so they likely will get on board too.
posted by zoopraxiscope at 10:33 AM on September 10, 2002
posted by zoopraxiscope at 10:33 AM on September 10, 2002
AMD and Intel both on the bandwagon? How... depressing. Anyone heard from Cyrix lately?
posted by John Smallberries at 10:38 AM on September 10, 2002
posted by John Smallberries at 10:38 AM on September 10, 2002
AMD is signed on with Palladium. I'm afraid the only salvation left lies with Apple.
Disclaimer: No, I'm probably even less happy about this than the rest of you. I *LIKE* rebuilding my computers from bare components 3-4 times a week. I HATE ease of use and consider it the enemy of all things good (security, stability, performance - in that order).
The truth is, in the end there won't be any freedom left on the Internet and we're all pretty much screwed . . . NO FUTURE!
posted by Ryvar at 10:38 AM on September 10, 2002
Disclaimer: No, I'm probably even less happy about this than the rest of you. I *LIKE* rebuilding my computers from bare components 3-4 times a week. I HATE ease of use and consider it the enemy of all things good (security, stability, performance - in that order).
The truth is, in the end there won't be any freedom left on the Internet and we're all pretty much screwed . . . NO FUTURE!
posted by Ryvar at 10:38 AM on September 10, 2002
Steve Jobs is whetting is lips as we discuss..."what an insanely great opportunity this is!"
posted by tgrundke at 10:50 AM on September 10, 2002
posted by tgrundke at 10:50 AM on September 10, 2002
it's surprising how the $500 billion tech industry is bending over for the $20 billion entertainment industry. come on Intel, just buy a senator like Hollywood does.
posted by deftone at 10:51 AM on September 10, 2002
posted by deftone at 10:51 AM on September 10, 2002
What I gather from the second article is that you have to be running the chip and Microsoft's Palladium software for it to have any effect. Is this correct? I mean, if that's the case, running Linux on an Intel or a Pentium, or even running Win2k shouldn't be a problem, right? In any event, I'll be avoiding this garbage like the plague, and if need be, get me a grape-colored iMac.
posted by adampsyche at 10:55 AM on September 10, 2002
posted by adampsyche at 10:55 AM on September 10, 2002
I would think that if you boycott the upgrade, you will get shut out of more and more places on the net. In the beginning, it will be free offerrrings, but you need DRM enabled soft/hardware to get in. Then they will start to charge and the net will turn a-la carte overrnite. And Apple will have to fall in line as well or be incompatible with the online status quo. Pre-drm boxes will become collectible as people horde them to be able to continue enjoying their pre DRM libraries.
(the typos are a personal gift to you-know-who)
posted by BentPenguin at 11:14 AM on September 10, 2002
(the typos are a personal gift to you-know-who)
posted by BentPenguin at 11:14 AM on September 10, 2002
You know, after the magic marker stunt, I don't worry anymore. This is hackable, like everything else. And if you don't know how to hack it, tough shit. It's the clueless who brought this on us (We need secure e-commerce - like, change the default password on your servers, dude!). They will suffer first and most. As I said, tough shit. Smarten up.
posted by magullo at 11:20 AM on September 10, 2002
posted by magullo at 11:20 AM on September 10, 2002
Note to Self:
1) Compile operating syatem in C++.
2) Port operating system to game console.
3) Connect to WWW.
4) Troll discussion forums, referring to anyone
and everyone as a "fuckwit".
5) Adjust compiled code and TCP/IP stack as necessary.
6) Sell schematics of my newly perfected
"Sony Flamestation" concept on eBay.
7) ???
8) Profit!!!
posted by Smart Dalek at 11:35 AM on September 10, 2002
1) Compile operating syatem in C++.
2) Port operating system to game console.
3) Connect to WWW.
4) Troll discussion forums, referring to anyone
and everyone as a "fuckwit".
5) Adjust compiled code and TCP/IP stack as necessary.
6) Sell schematics of my newly perfected
"Sony Flamestation" concept on eBay.
7) ???
8) Profit!!!
posted by Smart Dalek at 11:35 AM on September 10, 2002
There will be eventually be no Internet access at all for those who frustrate digital rights management. The ISPs will not be permitted to allow computers with DRM hardware or software to connect.
In my view, it has become time for the technology business and legal establishment to jump on board with the media companies. DRM, at a level which will prevent a typical end-user from enjoying music and movies without paying for them, is an inevitability. The only question is whether it is developed without the participation of the more sophisticated and adventuresome users, and hence disables many valuable and lawful functions or compromises security and privacy, or is developed with such collaboration.
Bottom line: in order to defend privacy, security, and functionality, we must once and for all abandon file sharing.
posted by MattD at 11:39 AM on September 10, 2002
In my view, it has become time for the technology business and legal establishment to jump on board with the media companies. DRM, at a level which will prevent a typical end-user from enjoying music and movies without paying for them, is an inevitability. The only question is whether it is developed without the participation of the more sophisticated and adventuresome users, and hence disables many valuable and lawful functions or compromises security and privacy, or is developed with such collaboration.
Bottom line: in order to defend privacy, security, and functionality, we must once and for all abandon file sharing.
posted by MattD at 11:39 AM on September 10, 2002
MattD:
DRM, at a level which will prevent a typical end-user from enjoying music and movies without paying for them, is an inevitability
You sound just like Valenti. Shame on you! The companies pushing for DRM are the same companies that lobby successfully for copyright extension everytime their copyrights expire. The respect they inspire on me is on the "kiss my ass" level.
PS: I do not have file sharing installed in my computer. My company pays for all the software I need. As for entertainment, I have an Asian wife. Those yearly trips to the Far East are very juicy. There are countries that have seen right through the scam and allow their citizens to pirate pretty openly.
posted by magullo at 11:49 AM on September 10, 2002
DRM, at a level which will prevent a typical end-user from enjoying music and movies without paying for them, is an inevitability
You sound just like Valenti. Shame on you! The companies pushing for DRM are the same companies that lobby successfully for copyright extension everytime their copyrights expire. The respect they inspire on me is on the "kiss my ass" level.
PS: I do not have file sharing installed in my computer. My company pays for all the software I need. As for entertainment, I have an Asian wife. Those yearly trips to the Far East are very juicy. There are countries that have seen right through the scam and allow their citizens to pirate pretty openly.
posted by magullo at 11:49 AM on September 10, 2002
The ISPs will not be permitted to allow computers with DRM hardware or software to connect.
Did you mean "The ISPs will not be permitted to allow computers without DRM hardware or software to connect."?
posted by dash_slot- at 12:08 PM on September 10, 2002
Did you mean "The ISPs will not be permitted to allow computers without DRM hardware or software to connect."?
posted by dash_slot- at 12:08 PM on September 10, 2002
MattD:
There will be eventually be no Internet access at all for those who frustrate digital rights management. The ISPs will not be permitted to allow computers with DRM hardware or software to connect.
In my view, it has become time for the technology business and legal establishment to jump on board with the media companies. DRM, at a level which will prevent a typical end-user from enjoying music and movies without paying for them, is an inevitability.
i see no reason to believe this. ISPs have a history of fighting requirements to log or monitor traffic both inbound and outbound through their networks. recently, verizon stood up to the RIAA regarding customer privacy. these companies don't want to be told how to manage their own networks, and i think that's the main thrust in preventing this bleak future to which you concede.
posted by moz at 12:21 PM on September 10, 2002
There will be eventually be no Internet access at all for those who frustrate digital rights management. The ISPs will not be permitted to allow computers with DRM hardware or software to connect.
In my view, it has become time for the technology business and legal establishment to jump on board with the media companies. DRM, at a level which will prevent a typical end-user from enjoying music and movies without paying for them, is an inevitability.
i see no reason to believe this. ISPs have a history of fighting requirements to log or monitor traffic both inbound and outbound through their networks. recently, verizon stood up to the RIAA regarding customer privacy. these companies don't want to be told how to manage their own networks, and i think that's the main thrust in preventing this bleak future to which you concede.
posted by moz at 12:21 PM on September 10, 2002
Crap, I can't believe AMD has signed on to this as well.
AMD had a chance to step forward and go with a new bus to replace the PCI bus. It's fast and dirt cheap. Instead, they're letting Intel make the decision. Intel is looking at some proprietary bus that will add to the cost of computers and maybe not perform as well. These are the same Intel execs who thought Rambus memory was what they needed to wring better peformance out of the Pentium 4 (Rambus is finally delivering).
posted by stevefromsparks at 12:26 PM on September 10, 2002
AMD had a chance to step forward and go with a new bus to replace the PCI bus. It's fast and dirt cheap. Instead, they're letting Intel make the decision. Intel is looking at some proprietary bus that will add to the cost of computers and maybe not perform as well. These are the same Intel execs who thought Rambus memory was what they needed to wring better peformance out of the Pentium 4 (Rambus is finally delivering).
posted by stevefromsparks at 12:26 PM on September 10, 2002
From the extreme tech article covering AMD's participation:
By integrating Wave's EMBASSY Trusted Client system into AMD's Athlon motherboard reference design, we will deliver a template for building cost optimized Trusted Client PCs.
What I read this as saying is that AMD will produce reference designs using this tech. AMD currently produces reference designs for their existing motherboard lines, but many manufacturers produce motherboards and most of them do not follow the reference designs. Companies like ASUS and Abit and a host of other manufacturers produce their own motherboard designs that don't follow the reference designs, in fact its in their best interests not to, their products tend to be cheaper and/or better designed. Seems to me there is hope that any number of manufacturers will produce boards that deviate from the reference designs to appeal to folks who don't want DRM baked into their motherboard.
Intel's approach of putting it in the chip is more problematic, but the real key is the OS - if the OS refuses to run on a system that doesn't support this spec, there will be problems. If it's simply a matter of some applications refusing to run, this is a non-issue, plenty of applications will step in to fill the void.
posted by Tempus67 at 12:59 PM on September 10, 2002
By integrating Wave's EMBASSY Trusted Client system into AMD's Athlon motherboard reference design, we will deliver a template for building cost optimized Trusted Client PCs.
What I read this as saying is that AMD will produce reference designs using this tech. AMD currently produces reference designs for their existing motherboard lines, but many manufacturers produce motherboards and most of them do not follow the reference designs. Companies like ASUS and Abit and a host of other manufacturers produce their own motherboard designs that don't follow the reference designs, in fact its in their best interests not to, their products tend to be cheaper and/or better designed. Seems to me there is hope that any number of manufacturers will produce boards that deviate from the reference designs to appeal to folks who don't want DRM baked into their motherboard.
Intel's approach of putting it in the chip is more problematic, but the real key is the OS - if the OS refuses to run on a system that doesn't support this spec, there will be problems. If it's simply a matter of some applications refusing to run, this is a non-issue, plenty of applications will step in to fill the void.
posted by Tempus67 at 12:59 PM on September 10, 2002
They'll try to get it through. The public will resist. Intel will cave and ship it with the features disabled by default.
Call it wishful thinking, but my computers are fast enough right now for 1000% of what I want to do with them. Most households have at least 1 computer. The only thing driving upgrades at this point is gamers. Do you really think gamers are going to leap at buying crippled systems?
They can convince government to buy it. They might be able to convince business to buy it, but the market will have to change significantly before businesses pick up the buying pace again. And that recovery might not come before the chip makers need to start making back the costs of their chip fabs. Consumers are going to come into this kicking and screaming though.
posted by willnot at 1:47 PM on September 10, 2002
Call it wishful thinking, but my computers are fast enough right now for 1000% of what I want to do with them. Most households have at least 1 computer. The only thing driving upgrades at this point is gamers. Do you really think gamers are going to leap at buying crippled systems?
They can convince government to buy it. They might be able to convince business to buy it, but the market will have to change significantly before businesses pick up the buying pace again. And that recovery might not come before the chip makers need to start making back the costs of their chip fabs. Consumers are going to come into this kicking and screaming though.
posted by willnot at 1:47 PM on September 10, 2002
Here is an idea: Switch.
I did 6 months ago, could not be more happy!
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 2:43 PM on September 10, 2002
I did 6 months ago, could not be more happy!
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 2:43 PM on September 10, 2002
Sorry to be late to reply ... but I would say that the reason why people who are technology progressives need to get on the bandwagon of DRM is precisely so that this does not become yet another "win" for the IP-ownership extremists.
The credibility necessary to oppose indefinite extension of copyrights and other abuses, is enhanced by being part of the right (in the legal, and inevitable-victory, senses) side on the issue of more simple anti-piracy regimes.
I also disagree about regulation of ISP. ISPs are far more easy to regulate, inherently, than are computer manufacturers. Everything they do is subject to the dictates of the FCC and Congress. This is another case where it may be privacy versus piracy. The order could come down from the FCC, "OK, we won't tell you what you must do with NO options, you can choose: either (a) log all your traffic down to the individual subscriber level, so we know who is getting and giving .mp3's and .mov's, or (b) only grant IPs or modem pool access to those who are running DRM software and hardware."
posted by MattD at 4:37 PM on September 10, 2002
The credibility necessary to oppose indefinite extension of copyrights and other abuses, is enhanced by being part of the right (in the legal, and inevitable-victory, senses) side on the issue of more simple anti-piracy regimes.
I also disagree about regulation of ISP. ISPs are far more easy to regulate, inherently, than are computer manufacturers. Everything they do is subject to the dictates of the FCC and Congress. This is another case where it may be privacy versus piracy. The order could come down from the FCC, "OK, we won't tell you what you must do with NO options, you can choose: either (a) log all your traffic down to the individual subscriber level, so we know who is getting and giving .mp3's and .mov's, or (b) only grant IPs or modem pool access to those who are running DRM software and hardware."
posted by MattD at 4:37 PM on September 10, 2002
Excellent.... hopefully Apple doesn't follow suit or I'm digging out my Centris 610 with MacOS 8.1 on it.
posted by nathan_teske at 5:30 PM on September 10, 2002
posted by nathan_teske at 5:30 PM on September 10, 2002
As for entertainment, I have an Asian wife. Those yearly trips to the Far East are very juicy.
i had to read this four times to finally get what you were trying to say...
posted by lotsofno at 7:52 PM on September 10, 2002
i had to read this four times to finally get what you were trying to say...
posted by lotsofno at 7:52 PM on September 10, 2002
I find this sad, but honestly - as long as there is unprotected stuff out there, created by people who want to share it, I have no problem with people locking down content.
The web (and before it Usenet) that I remember fondly is the precommercial, experimental, collective labour of love. If you don't buy into packaged culture, the hermetic sealing of the package is irrelevant.
If I can't get on the air at all, or share stuff I create, that'll be different. But my thinking is that stupid, draconian controls are likely to be counterproductive to those who promote them, and in the end, they needn't affect the stuff I really care about.l
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 1:45 AM on September 11, 2002
The web (and before it Usenet) that I remember fondly is the precommercial, experimental, collective labour of love. If you don't buy into packaged culture, the hermetic sealing of the package is irrelevant.
If I can't get on the air at all, or share stuff I create, that'll be different. But my thinking is that stupid, draconian controls are likely to be counterproductive to those who promote them, and in the end, they needn't affect the stuff I really care about.l
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 1:45 AM on September 11, 2002
Thank God I replaced all my WinTel with Macs this year.
posted by Cerebus at 7:06 AM on September 11, 2002
posted by Cerebus at 7:06 AM on September 11, 2002
« Older archive.org | Terrorism Status: Orange - High Condition Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by agregoli at 10:20 AM on September 10, 2002