3 ms·

I don't see the big deal. Right now DRM depends on proprietary plug-ins. If this is allowed in HTML5, DRM will still depend on proprietary plug-ins. What is d

by runn1ng 14y ago

I don't see the big deal. Right now DRM depends on proprietary plug-ins. If this is allowed in HTML5, DRM will still depend on proprietary plug-ins. What is different? edit: also, browser vendors don't have to implement it if they don't want to. Really, I don't like this DRM thing that much, but I am kind of indifferent to this.

AnthonyMouse 14y ago
>What is different? That's kind of the point. The people promoting this seem to be misunderstanding what the result would be. It would in no way reduce the amount of poorly written proprietary code full of security vulnerabilities. It would just move it around a little. But in the meantime it breaks the web. Even if you support the new HTML5 spec, you can't actually support it without having the proprietary black box necessary to make it work. You break the ability of the web to be platform agnostic. For the web to work at all you'll soon end up needing the black box, because once it's there sites will use it. So if the black box doesn't exist for your platform or you want to create a new platform then you'll be locked out of most of the web. How can that be acceptable?
- runn1ng 14y ago
  But it is NOT platform agnostic anyway. That is my point. Right now, you have to have certain plugins to see certain sites. At this very moment. So according to the new specification, there won't be <embed> with a specified plugin in TYPE attribute (or something similar in <object>), but probably something else and similar with EME. Why does it matter so much? If this is not passed, evil corporations will use <embed> and <object> again. If this is and browsers will support it, they will use EME instead. Again, I can't see any big change.
  - AnthonyMouse 14y ago
    We should oppose the old plug-ins just like we do the new ones. The big change is that the old plug-ins have been starting to die out. People originally used Flash because it was the best way to play video in a web browser, not because it had DRM. As improvements to HTML eliminate the non-DRM need for such plug-ins, the plug-ins start to go away. Apple got away with prohibiting Flash on iOS because it became possible to use Youtube et al without it. We ought to be encouraging the legacy plug-ins to finish going away, not reintroducing new ones.

by runn1ng 14y ago

AnthonyMouse 14y ago

>What is different? That's kind of the point. The people promoting this seem to be misunderstanding what the result would be. It would in no way reduce the amount of poorly written proprietary code full of security vulnerabilities. It would just move it around a little. But in the meantime it breaks the web. Even if you support the new HTML5 spec, you can't actually support it without having the proprietary black box necessary to make it work. You break the ability of the web to be platform agnostic. For the web to work at all you'll soon end up needing the black box, because once it's there sites will use it. So if the black box doesn't exist for your platform or you want to create a new platform then you'll be locked out of most of the web. How can that be acceptable?

runn1ng 14y ago
But it is NOT platform agnostic anyway. That is my point. Right now, you have to have certain plugins to see certain sites. At this very moment. So according to the new specification, there won't be <embed> with a specified plugin in TYPE attribute (or something similar in <object>), but probably something else and similar with EME. Why does it matter so much? If this is not passed, evil corporations will use <embed> and <object> again. If this is and browsers will support it, they will use EME instead. Again, I can't see any big change.
- AnthonyMouse 14y ago
  We should oppose the old plug-ins just like we do the new ones. The big change is that the old plug-ins have been starting to die out. People originally used Flash because it was the best way to play video in a web browser, not because it had DRM. As improvements to HTML eliminate the non-DRM need for such plug-ins, the plug-ins start to go away. Apple got away with prohibiting Flash on iOS because it became possible to use Youtube et al without it. We ought to be encouraging the legacy plug-ins to finish going away, not reintroducing new ones.