4 ms·

Having the EME specification distributed by the W3C appears to be a very effective method of propaganda. > A standard we don't like isn't propaganda. A "stand

Having the EME specification distributed by the W3C appears to be a very effective method of propaganda. > A standard we don't like isn't propaganda. A "standard" that doesn't even attempt to fulfil the purpose of a standard is not a standard.

shadowgovt 7y ago
What purpose is it failing to fulfill? It outlines how to indicate media is encrypted and how decryptors can be surfaced by the user-agent. It doesn't indicate how decryption must happen, but OAuth2 doesn't indicate what standard an authorization server should use to authorize that a client matches a resource owner either.
- anoncake 7y ago
  > What purpose is it failing to fulfill? Here you are: > The point of standards is to facilitate interoperability. > but OAuth2 isn't the topic.
  - shadowgovt 7y ago
    It facilitates interoperability between content providers and user agents to convey and display encrypted media (without the need for one company to own both sides if that pipe, like in the Flash era). Much as OAuth2 facilitates authorization handshakes between services owned by different companies.
    - anoncake 7y ago
      Facilitating DRM, which runs counter to interoperability, is exactly why EME isn't a standard. And please stop spamming your OAuth2 nonsense, it's off topic.
      - shadowgovt 7y ago
        I keep bringing up OAuth2 because it's in a similar domain to EME. Authorization restricts access to resources that users are not supposed to be accessing (for whatever reason, be it privacy or they simply haven't paid to access it). Similarly, encryption restricts usage of resources in ways users are not supposed to use them (including having not paid for the privilege). It's not "counter to interoperability" that Google Drive won't fork over your documents to anyone who requests them without the right token. Your frustration isn't the technology, it's what it's used for. If you want to claim EME isn't a standard, clarify how it differs from OAuth2.
        anoncake 7y ago
        > Authorization restricts access to resources that users are not supposed to be accessing (for whatever reason, be it privacy or they simply haven't paid to access it). Oh, sorry. I thought you actually knew what DRM is. https://www.defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm_digital_restrictions_management https://www.defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm_digital_restri... > Your frustration isn't the technology, it's what it's used for. Stop trying to read my mind, it's a violation of privacy and physics. > If you want to claim EME isn't a standard, clarify how it differs from OAuth2. If there is no relevant difference, then OAuth2 isn't a standard either. Happy now?
        shadowgovt 7y ago
        > If there is no relevant difference, then OAuth2 isn't a standard either. Happy now? In the sense that you've reached the conclusion that your definition of "standard" isn't sufficiently universal to discuss the topic because you've excluded what is generally accepted to be a widely-accepted authorization standard that lacked the controversy over socioeconomic control that the EME standard does, yes. Trying to short-circuit debate by bullying the field of definitions and declaring the other viewpoint "propaganda" isn't constructive.
        anoncake 7y ago
        Stop twisting my words. Thanks.

shadowgovt 7y ago

What purpose is it failing to fulfill? It outlines how to indicate media is encrypted and how decryptors can be surfaced by the user-agent. It doesn't indicate how decryption must happen, but OAuth2 doesn't indicate what standard an authorization server should use to authorize that a client matches a resource owner either.

anoncake 7y ago
> What purpose is it failing to fulfill? Here you are: > The point of standards is to facilitate interoperability. > but OAuth2 isn't the topic.
- shadowgovt 7y ago
  It facilitates interoperability between content providers and user agents to convey and display encrypted media (without the need for one company to own both sides if that pipe, like in the Flash era). Much as OAuth2 facilitates authorization handshakes between services owned by different companies.
  - anoncake 7y ago
    Facilitating DRM, which runs counter to interoperability, is exactly why EME isn't a standard. And please stop spamming your OAuth2 nonsense, it's off topic.
    - shadowgovt 7y ago
      I keep bringing up OAuth2 because it's in a similar domain to EME. Authorization restricts access to resources that users are not supposed to be accessing (for whatever reason, be it privacy or they simply haven't paid to access it). Similarly, encryption restricts usage of resources in ways users are not supposed to use them (including having not paid for the privilege). It's not "counter to interoperability" that Google Drive won't fork over your documents to anyone who requests them without the right token. Your frustration isn't the technology, it's what it's used for. If you want to claim EME isn't a standard, clarify how it differs from OAuth2.
      - anoncake 7y ago
        > Authorization restricts access to resources that users are not supposed to be accessing (for whatever reason, be it privacy or they simply haven't paid to access it). Oh, sorry. I thought you actually knew what DRM is. https://www.defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm_digital_restrictions_management https://www.defectivebydesign.org/what_is_drm_digital_restri... > Your frustration isn't the technology, it's what it's used for. Stop trying to read my mind, it's a violation of privacy and physics. > If you want to claim EME isn't a standard, clarify how it differs from OAuth2. If there is no relevant difference, then OAuth2 isn't a standard either. Happy now?
        shadowgovt 7y ago
        > If there is no relevant difference, then OAuth2 isn't a standard either. Happy now? In the sense that you've reached the conclusion that your definition of "standard" isn't sufficiently universal to discuss the topic because you've excluded what is generally accepted to be a widely-accepted authorization standard that lacked the controversy over socioeconomic control that the EME standard does, yes. Trying to short-circuit debate by bullying the field of definitions and declaring the other viewpoint "propaganda" isn't constructive.
        anoncake 7y ago
        Stop twisting my words. Thanks.