4 ms·
DRM was coming to browsers with or without the W3C’s blessing. In fact, it was already there via plugins and wasn’t going away. This has changed nothing except
by Analemma_ 9y ago
DRM was coming to browsers with or without the W3C’s blessing. In fact, it was already there via plugins and wasn’t going away. This has changed nothing except where the implementation is documented.
The hysteria over this is just ridiculous.
- wyager 9y agoJust because some horrible thing currently happens to exist doesn't mean you need to (explicitly or implicitly) endorse it. We should make implementing DRM as expensive and inconvenient as possible.
- nobodyorother 9y agoTotally! We're going to have to start by making sure we never standardize it. </sarcasm>
- wyager 9y agoYes, absolutely. What's confusing about that? If the DRM benefactors have to keep developing shitty, expensive, unsupported plugins that need to use unofficial APIs and therefore be updated all the time, it's going to cost a lot more to use DRM.
- _dev_pts_0 9y agoAlthough I share your enthusiasm, I don't think closing the barn door after the horse left is going to help. Customers have to organize and demand an end to DRM by force of withholding money, clicks and eyeballs ... "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." - Frederick Douglass
- wyager 9y agoI'm not sure what your analogy is supposed to express, but this isn't some ideological stand; it's a simple matter of increasing maintenance costs for DRM software.
- Accacin 9y agoDRM doesn't and will never work. It only serves to annoy people that pay for the movie/game/whatever legitimately. It's against everything the W3C stands for. You dont' have to support something just because it's happening. You fight it, you don't give into it.
- skrowl 9y agoI think you mean "against everything the W3C used to stand for" here. Clearly they stand for DRM now.
- _dev_pts_0 9y agoThe problem with W3C and many other standards committee bodies: they often get infected by a few vocal, greedy corporate jerks whom manipulate and complicate standards. It's a similar anti-pattern as any social special interest group when SJWs infect them and make everyone cool want to leave: the Tragedy of the Undefended Commons. Us average "grassroots" folks need to new find ways to get involved more directly and edge out these corporate clones whom pose a threat to open society.
- Analemma_ 9y ago> DRM doesn't and will never work. It only serves to annoy people that pay for the movie/game/whatever legitimately. I never said otherwise, and in fact I totally agree. A big part of my annoyance at the outrage over EME is the automatic assumption that you must be pro-DRM if you're not joining the furor. > It's against everything the W3C stands for. No, that's you (and everyone on this thread) projecting. The W3C is, and has always been, an engineering interoperability organization developing a data interchange format. It's right in their mission statement: "The W3C mission is to lead the World Wide Web to its full potential by developing protocols and guidelines that ensure the long-term growth of the Web". Notice what isn't in that sentence. Everything about "freedom", "openness", etc. is other people projecting onto them. Before EME, web DRM is documented in the various plugin architectures. After EME, web DRM is documented in the HTML5 spec. From an engineering perspective, the difference is practically nil. The emotional overreaction here is just because of a perceived betrayal that isn't even real.