5 ms·

What Netflix is doing that hurts the web is opposing net neutrality now that they're big enough they can bargain for special treatment. This—on the other hand—

What Netflix is doing that hurts the web is opposing net neutrality now that they're big enough they can bargain for special treatment. This—on the other hand—provides a replacement for use cases which used poorly-supported, insecure, and battery-hungry proprietary plugins. I run Safari with no extensions and having this for Netflix and Amazon is fantastic. I trust Apple to patch security vulnerabilities and the browser is auto-updated along with the rest of my system. Not having to worry about Flash zero-days is more important to me than some purity argument about what the W3C should be doing. If you seriously think VoD services were going to operate using standards without DRM in place I'm not sure you'll find many productive conversations on this topic. The web has been dead for some time and Netflix had very little to do with that.

davexunit 10y ago
You're not getting EME extensions from Apple, you're getting them from the third-party that developed the extensions. You can count on terrible security vulnerabilities being found in these. Movies aren't important. Netflix isn't important. The open web, the ideology (or as you put it pejoratively, "purity") behind it, is important.
- maxerickson 10y ago
  So when an EME is installed open videos don't play anymore or something?
- jasonmp85 10y ago
  You don't need to Trojan-horse DRM into W3C standards to kill the web. Facebook Instant Articles, Google AMP, adtech, and general trends toward centralization are doing that just fine with no changes in standards whatsoever. The amount of heat this change has generated is disproportionate to its actual role as a threat to the open web
- tzs 10y ago
  What do you mean by "open web"? From the beginning or near the beginning it was possible and not uncommon to put things on the web with restricted access. The HTTP protocol itself supports a couple of login mechanisms which were intended to be used to restrict access to content, and these have been there since at least as early as 1996.
  - Touche 10y ago
    Meaning anyone can implement the technology that can show a web page. You can't show Netflix's web page, unless they preapprove of your DRM.
    - tptacek 10y ago
      And that's different from a web page that won't allow you to access it without a password, how? In both cases, a business decision by a third party limits what you're able to access. I understand that you don't want to run code Netflix approves of and that you're not permitted to read in its original source form. And that's fine, a good reason not to subscribe to Netflix. But how is that any more an offense to "the open web" than a subscription-only website?
      - Touche 10y ago
        > And that's different from a web page that won't allow you to access it without a password, how? It works the same regardless of what browser or OS you are using.
        deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
        tptacek 10y ago
        The point of EME is to minimize the amount of code that differs between platforms, by standardizing everything but (in essence) the authenticated key derivation step.
        BuuQu9hu 10y ago
        This is false. EME describes only the interface between the Javascript environment and the CDM. It says nothing about the CDM's interface with the browser code, which is the heart of the issue.
        10y ago
benedikt 10y ago
> If you seriously think VoD services were going to operate using standards without DRM in place I'm not sure you'll find many productive conversations on this topic. I know you are completely right. But I'm still not happy about it and I will still complain about it. The technical ineffectiveness of DRM isn't something that needs to be explained on HN, this is absolutely about business people and lawyers getting too much power without having the necessary technical understanding. While I'm waiting for the solution on that, I'll continue watching torrented shows that are obviously Netflix screencaps.

davexunit 10y ago

You're not getting EME extensions from Apple, you're getting them from the third-party that developed the extensions. You can count on terrible security vulnerabilities being found in these. Movies aren't important. Netflix isn't important. The open web, the ideology (or as you put it pejoratively, "purity") behind it, is important.

maxerickson 10y ago
So when an EME is installed open videos don't play anymore or something?
jasonmp85 10y ago
You don't need to Trojan-horse DRM into W3C standards to kill the web. Facebook Instant Articles, Google AMP, adtech, and general trends toward centralization are doing that just fine with no changes in standards whatsoever. The amount of heat this change has generated is disproportionate to its actual role as a threat to the open web
tzs 10y ago
What do you mean by "open web"? From the beginning or near the beginning it was possible and not uncommon to put things on the web with restricted access. The HTTP protocol itself supports a couple of login mechanisms which were intended to be used to restrict access to content, and these have been there since at least as early as 1996.
- Touche 10y ago
  Meaning anyone can implement the technology that can show a web page. You can't show Netflix's web page, unless they preapprove of your DRM.
  - tptacek 10y ago
    And that's different from a web page that won't allow you to access it without a password, how? In both cases, a business decision by a third party limits what you're able to access. I understand that you don't want to run code Netflix approves of and that you're not permitted to read in its original source form. And that's fine, a good reason not to subscribe to Netflix. But how is that any more an offense to "the open web" than a subscription-only website?
    - Touche 10y ago
      > And that's different from a web page that won't allow you to access it without a password, how? It works the same regardless of what browser or OS you are using.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
      - tptacek 10y ago
        The point of EME is to minimize the amount of code that differs between platforms, by standardizing everything but (in essence) the authenticated key derivation step.
        BuuQu9hu 10y ago
        This is false. EME describes only the interface between the Javascript environment and the CDM. It says nothing about the CDM's interface with the browser code, which is the heart of the issue.
        10y ago

benedikt 10y ago

> If you seriously think VoD services were going to operate using standards without DRM in place I'm not sure you'll find many productive conversations on this topic. I know you are completely right. But I'm still not happy about it and I will still complain about it. The technical ineffectiveness of DRM isn't something that needs to be explained on HN, this is absolutely about business people and lawyers getting too much power without having the necessary technical understanding. While I'm waiting for the solution on that, I'll continue watching torrented shows that are obviously Netflix screencaps.