We are Huxleying ourselves into the full Orwell.
 

Cory Doctorow, the dude from boingboing and a whole slew of other things, is pretty up on the internet and things that affect it. I've always considered him to be pretty stable, as in not doing the sky is falling bit. So this struck me as serious shit.

link

Netflix!!? I can't decide whether to keep up with and argue this stuff, switch off, or just take it in the mouth when all is lost. I wrote an email to Bob Casey recently and he (er underling) sent back a pretty focused and reasonable sounding reply but the bottom line was what we find concerning and what officials inside the government find concerning are pretty out of sync.

Doesn't this just mean that we'll all have our main home "media center" computer, that runs Netflix and lets us read NYTimes articles, and then we'll all have our secondary computers that run alternative browsers and go to all the non-corporate-behemoth sites we want to go to?

The technically-inclined will always find a way around stuff. The corporations just have to make their system easy enough, and hard enough to circumvent, for the average person not to bother. See iTunes vs. bitTorrent. Everyone said the MPAA was a bunch of Orwellian bastards and no one would ever pay for mp3s, but they made it work for 80% of the people, which is all they really had to do.

am I a jerk for not knowing what netflix is?
is it anything to do with the much-loved and sadly missed Netscape?

Home-delivery DVD rental and movie/TV streaming service. Because of Netflix, my family does not watch live TV anymore, ever.

I've just googled it.
netflix is for streaming tv and movies to games consoles.
I have never done this on any device and will never get a games console.

I don't see a problem here, unless the bit that spies on movie streams also spies on my activities that are nothing to do with movies, like work emails for example.

thanx clodfobble, was typing mine as you posted yours.
using an iPhone and rubber-ended stylus thing, fingers/thumbs not compatible with tiny onscreen keyboard.

It's not just to games consoles and dedicated media machines like the Roku; it's also to regular computers and smartphones. Most of my viewing happens through my laptop on the kitchen counter. Even if you never stream on your regular computer, what matters is that a lot of other people do, and Netflix thus has power over all the browser companies. The problem is not "what does Netflix do while I'm running it," the problem is "what requirements and/or content blocking does Netflix require the browser companies to incorporate into their products, which will then negatively affect your ability to, say, get to other sites whose content is not deemed (by the all-knowing god Netflix) to be DRM-compatible, and will also allow the criminally-minded to access your data in ways you cannot see or verify because the browser companies refuse (on behalf of Netflix) to allow you to see their code."

so we should boycott Netflix?

if firefox is currently 100% open source, as I've recently read... couldn't we just continue to use the current version if they decide to make a closed version?

will the next revolution be fought in cyberspace?

I read the EFF argument against this, and it was chock full of slippery slope. Apparently this proposed change to make it harder to capture a streamed video will lead directly to a world where you can't cut and paste a paragraph of text.

They already have ways to make it hard to cut and paste a paragraph of text (javascript, overlays), but due to open standards, it's usually possible to get around them. Is it really an unjustified slippery slope argument that they will use the available technology to do for real what they are already trying to do?

Yes.

All slippery slope arguments are logical fallacies.

so the answer seems like getting the last version of everything* befor the shits change it to the HTML5 taking-it-roughly-up-the-arse-from-Netflicks version, and then never ever accept any upgrades?

* Firefox, iOS, Safari, Linux, whatever, etc.,

once you start using slippery slope arguments, the next thing you know you're employing straw men and red herrings. it's a slippery slope.

No they aren't.

"It's already happening, but the tools are imperfect. This provides better tools to do it." is a rational argument and demonstrable mechanism.

Yes, the techies will work around, but with the sharing of that information, being illegal, it won't be on nerd sites, it will have to be completely under the table. Other than getting the techies laid more, I see no good coming from it.:(

No, HM, it doesn't inevitably follow that the provision for DRM on streaming media will lead to DRM on all other media for HTML5 and/or all other protocols everywhere.

It's like this. Does anyone here have Flash installed? Anyone?

Then you may sit down and shut up. You've been running a DRM platform that you couldn't see the source code for, controlled by a single corporation (Adobe), working outside of web protocols. And it was, up until recently the by-far predominant method of display of most video on the web.

When Netflix came along, they didn't like how Flash was all like controlled and whatnot, and so they chose Silverlight. Another DRM platform that you couldn't see the source code for, controlled by a single corporation (Microsoft), working outside of web protocols. Do you watch Netflix on your PC or Mac? You have chosen to use a non-web protocol controlled by Microsoft.

It's shitty that these various corporate-controlled platforms sit like barnacles on the web. They are dragging the whole boat down. Why can't we figure out a way to have everything be HTML5?

Why does Doctorow think this is giving away the keys to some secret castle? End of everything? Did he not notice that all iPads, iPhones and iPods are a seriously closed platform that people choose of their own free will? Did he not notice how much of the web is happening outside of web protocols? Maybe he had a bad day. I know I've sat on conferences where I thought the result was going to be the end of the world. It never turned out to be true.

Part two, next message.

We've already discussed this you know. It was 2006, and the threat was

The Internet is over!

It was driven by a Nation article The End of the Internet?.

That's horrible! But when does their evil plan begin? Because while they can "craft" "strategies" all day long, here we are 8 years into the plan and -- hey, wait a minute... a fee for everything we do online... are they talking about Candy Crush?

~

My post in "The Internet is over!" is one I'm still proud of. Proud, you know, proud like hey I squeezed out a particularly nice turd today. But I would still call you over to admire my turd, which applies here in this thread as much as it did those many years ago. It said:
This is the Internet, and we are in charge here. I promise you, that is true. The network is many protocols, and it will be many protocols. These protocols are here to serve us. When they don't, they will be discarded, overridden. Many have been discarded and overridden before. It's part of the whole point.

"The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it." -- John Gilmore

Still true today. It's because humans are part of the network. That's US. WE are in charge here.

I'm glad to hear that because I have great faith in your assessment. I'm only slightly more knowledgeable than the random man on the street when it comes to this shit.

I was worried because Doctorow seems to be up on this stuff and the movers/shakers behind it. When they start making laws against end-runs, and the NSA already knows who's running... can you say federal job security. :unsure: