4 ms·
From a comment by a Mozilla employee on another thread, it seems that the UI for this has not yet been determined[0]. It's possible that this may be presented t
by chimeracoder 12y ago
From a comment by a Mozilla employee on another thread, it seems that the UI for this has not yet been determined[0]. It's possible that this may be presented to the user in a way similar to a plugin installation, except that the plugin happens to be provided by Mozilla (not a third-party).
This isn't great, but to the end user, it looks the same as Flash and Silverlight.
Especially if Mozilla were to add click-to-play for all such plugins, along with an explanation of what they are (think of the warnings that are currently shown for self-signed certs), they may still have an opportunity to do good with this yet.
I'd really love for Mozilla to remain as true to its mission as possible. On the other hand, Mozilla's power to do good in the world is intrinsically linked to its marketshare[1]. If Mozilla ends up being the lone holdout, it's possible that they will just lose marketshare as DRM content becomes more widespread - that would be quite a Pyrrhic victory[2].
I share in the EFF's disappointment at the situation, though (saldy) this has been inevitable for some time.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7744954 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7744954
[1] Perhaps not 100%, but it's a major component of it.
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrrhic_victory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrrhic_victory
- farresito 12y agoWhat really worries me is the fact that now it's going to be way easier to implement something with DRM. A lot of users nowadays are not willing to install some third party plugin. The fact that it comes with the browser means that it's extremely easy to implement something with that DRM. I might be wrong, since I haven't read much about it.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- evv 12y agoI doubt netflix looses much business because they require silverlight to watch. On the contrary, making DRM tech more accessible to developers will only help young startups build platforms that are "content provider friendly". This will promote competition in the online entertainment space and ultimately drive prices down. I'm no fan of DRM but I see the value it serves. Just like advertising. I don't see why everybody is making such a fuss about this when we already have a wide proliferation of plugin-based DRM. Why are people complaining that it is moving towards an even more open layer?
- throwwit 12y ago>... will only help young startups build platforms that are "content provider friendly". This will promote competition... That is anathema to their business model dynamic; licenses are stringently kept to stretch exclusivity. Platforms!? (plural?), the DRM tech debate is about monopolizing/standardizing THE platform. >I'm no fan of DRM but I see the value it serves. Just like advertising. You must have never had a VCR... smh... With this DRM, and Sisyphean-esque copyright term-limit laws... I'm wary of how much influence the content industry will have on tech.
- Dylan16807 12y agoIt doesn't come with the browser.
- pcwalton 12y agoIt's been made clear that, whatever happens, "users will have control over whether the CDM is used in their copy of Firefox."
- saganus 12y ago"...until we decide otherwise" (for different values of "we") Edit: Added last part.
- kevingadd 12y agoBullshit. It's open source. You're being paranoid. You can recompile it with CDMs turned off entirely or download a fork that does it.
- nullc 12y ago> It's open source [...] You can recompile it Careful. Thats a somewhat empty response. It's technically true, but its an enormous barrier— even if someone else compiles it for you, how do you know their binary is trustworthy? It's like saying that humans don't need oxygen to survive, because you can extract oxygen from the electrolysis of water. :) You have to consider the tradeoffs users are presented with, and the _practical_ freedom to choose is lost far before the cost of the choice becomes infinite. Fortunately in this case participation will be opt in, though perhaps market forces will make it hard to opt out— but if so the belief is that the same forces would just force you to use Chrome and miss out on the other choices that Firefox leaves open to you.
- mehwoot 12y agoCareful. Thats a somewhat empty response. It's technically true, but its an enormous barrier— even if someone else compiles it for you, how do you know their binary is trustworthy? Your claim is incoherent... if you don't currently compile firefox yourself, then you're in exactly the same situation, how do you know the binary is trustworthy? If you do currently compile it yourself, what's the big deal?
- niels_olson 12y agoMaybe we can get a "drm block" plugin? a little pop-up that tells the user what's up, and two buttons: "submit" and "save yourself: get out of here"