6 ms·

Discussing "licensing" in a thread about coffee. Fuck. This is not what the future was supposed to be about. The future was supposed to bring us infinite possi

Discussing "licensing" in a thread about coffee. Fuck. This is not what the future was supposed to be about. The future was supposed to bring us infinite possibilities through the means of technology. It was meant to be awesome. It was not meant to be artificially limited through the means of technology which could have been used to make our lives better instead. Where did we go wrong?

valleyer 12y ago
Money.
DanBC 12y ago
"The Calorie Man" (short story by Paulo Bacigalupi) is about licenced crops and agribusiness. It'd be neat to read something similar about domestic DRM. http://www.nightshadebooks.com/Downloads/WindupStories.pdf http://www.nightshadebooks.com/Downloads/WindupStories.pdf
- kcmarshall 12y ago
  All of the stories in Bacigalupi's _The_Windup_Girl_ universe contain sub-plots about the 'Calorie Cartels' based in Iowa. Really good reading for a near-apocalyptic vision of a post-Oil, mid-climate crisis world. Full-on Trigger Warning for some of the sexual content in _The_Windup_Girl_ though.
- nkurz 12y ago
  Wow! You are right. This is an incredibly apt dystopian view of the future of DRM. Read it.
arcosdev 12y ago
We started drinking garbage coffee
- ynniv 12y ago
  Yes! If you care more about coffee and less about convenience you'll end up pouring freshly ground beans over hot water and there isn't a damn thing technology can do to interfere there.
  - mcguire 12y ago
    Cough, cough, AeroPress[1], cough. It's almost as convenient for a single cup as Keurig, much cheaper, and if you've got a local coffee roaster, much, much better. [1] http://aerobie.com/products/aeropress.htm http://aerobie.com/products/aeropress.htm
icebraining 12y ago
Where did we go wrong? Had unreasonable expectations?
smackfu 12y ago
You watched different movies than I did.
forgottenpass 12y ago
Where did we go wrong? "Because money" is sufficient justification for actions in business that would otherwise be classified as sociopathic. This is fairly light in the grand scheme of things.
aaronem 12y ago
Did you expect not to need to be smart?
digi_owl 12y ago
Matter energy conversion didn't happen...
- Someone1234 12y ago
  And if/when it does you totally know you'll pay a licence fee for each "pattern" you materialise. I mean people pay over $1 for a Christmas card and the justification for that is "someone has to come up with the designs!"
chillingeffect 12y ago
> Where did we go wrong? Fantastic line of discussion! Glad you're bringing it up. We went wrong when we said, "We can have infinite possibilities, but only through >ME<." And then we cemented the deal when we went along with the "guy" who said, "You can only have infinite possibilities through >ME<." And we let it get worse when we rationalize the Keurig with bullshit like "Having a pot of coffee around is unsafe because of the burner, etc." Technology is a stand-in for relationships - what you would do for someone if you were there, but conveniently you've duplicated yourself via machine. We went wrong when we said, "Well, if I was there, I would prevent you from having coffee from a convenient machine." In reality you wouldn't - you would share as much as possible. However, when we replace ourselves with machines designed by greedy committees, we write ourselves out of the equation.
- jchrome 12y ago
  Not to mention that pouring boiling water through cheap plastic leaches industrial chemicals into our coffee, thereby increasing our chances of cancer. Plus Keurig tastes like a cup of monkey-poo. French press is the way to go (or iced coffee).
protonfish 12y ago
The flaw is thinking that technology alone can help people. If you created a machine that magically makes everyone the equivalent of a billionaire, but don't fix an imbalance of power - that certain people are allowed to take as much as they want from anyone with less power and privilege - then you have helped nobody. We first must fix the problem of authority.
ultramancool 12y ago
We went wrong when we discouraged hackers and competitors from doing this kind of thing. If this wasn't encouraged by government, products like the Keurig 2.0 would be broken quickly and soon after vanish. DRM should not be a viable business model. You want to prosecute copyright infringers, fine, that's one thing, but if you're attacking people who break DRM systems, that's quite another.
dhm 12y ago
I think it's important to at least acknowledge the desire a "razor/razorblades" device manufacturer has for maintaining the quality of their brand by controlling to some extent the user experiences that are possible with their tool. To me, this seems similar to Sony and Nintendo wanting the right to certify titles that run on their consoles. You can argue about whether removing freedom from the user is worth the trade for a reliable user experience, and you can argue about the right place to draw the quality line, but they're trying to guarantee a certain minimum level of user experience by doing this. If Keurig coffee was somehow astoundingly good out of their machine, with their pods, would we have less of a problem with what they are doing? What Keurig is doing also doesn't prevent another manufacturer from competing with an unencumbered alternative. Shouldn't we expect such a system to compete in the marketplace on its merits?
- uxp 12y ago
  > What Keurig is doing also doesn't prevent another manufacturer from competing with an unencumbered alternative Not sure if this fits the definition of irony, but Keurig is the company that came up with the unencumbered 1.0 coffee pod standard. The original DRM was the idea that a scoop of ground coffee beans was incompatible with the pod brewer. 2.0 is exactly the same, but with the RFID (I'm assuming. I haven't cared to look into it) "protection". I'd imagine 3.0 will have some kind of boolean logic much like inkjet cartridges have these days that will make the thing complain that the pod has already been used. Though, I entirely agree with you. This DRM is only present because Keurig wants to protect it's brand. It came up with the pod brewer concept, much like Apple came up with the iPhone and it's app store. Rejecting what it deems to be inferior or competitive to it's goals is it's objective. I'd wish everything was more open and available for interoperability, but it's their product up until I purchase it, so the design is out of my control.
squeaky-clean 12y ago
I suppose it's making Keurig's lives better. Infinite possibilities through the means of technology includes digitally protected coffee.
zackmorris 12y ago
A big ah hah moment for me was realizing that money is a representation of inefficiency. So for example, if everyone had a means of growing their own food, generating their own electricity, taking care of their own health, and had unlimited access to information, we wouldn't need to buy things or pay for services. A Mr. Fusion and a replicator would be all we needed. That’s probably the real reason they don’t use money on Star Trek. Not so much because they eliminated scarcity (which they obviously did, with numerous planets to choose from) but because giving everyone the basic means to sustain themselves was such a small fraction of the economy that it became dehumanizing to force people to work so much when society could provide for all within the percentage of a rounding error. This concept’s relevance for coffee makers: what’s a coffee maker without coffee? Anyone can brew coffee by pouring hot water through a sock (as it’s done in much of the developing world) and I can say from experience that it’s both more convenient and can even make a better cup. So the key is the coffee, not the machine. It’s not really surprising that Keurig wants to cement itself as a middleman, and since coffee is everywhere, it was probably inevitable that they’d turn to a DRM solution. Hydroponics, fabless photovoltaics and big data medicine are going to be what take us into the future, not some kitchen gismo. In fact, the more I witness “progress” in my lifetime, the more I see that the really revolutionary stuff like the internet is generally free and shared by all. Otherwise it just makes some guy rich. I want to be rich too, but I’ve spent half my life chasing a goal that wouldn’t even be necessary if I was off the grid and could just get left the heck alone.
- merlincorey 12y ago
  The internet is far from generally free and it is in danger of being shared by all (which of course this community is well aware of) by "fast lanes" and other detrimental laws motivated by middlemen who want money.
- _Adam 12y ago
  Money is just a tool humans use to represent value. It is up to us to decide what is valuable. It's not about efficiency or inefficiency. You can't alone create everything. Food, water, power, maybe. But what about designing something great and complex? You could argue people would do this for free, but that's not right. A designer isn't an emoting artist seeking to express some particular vision. A designer solves humanity's problems. There's usually lots of things we want to express, but we don't have time to express them all. The way we select the problem to solve is by evaluating the economic potential of it. In other words, money makes people solve problems other people care about. It's the fitness function of technological evolution.
keithpeter 12y ago
My future is not artifically limited through the means of technology. I use my trusty moka pot for decent coffee and instant when I'm on the run (I have no shame). Seriously: analogue for analogue things folks.

valleyer 12y ago

Money.

DanBC 12y ago

"The Calorie Man" (short story by Paulo Bacigalupi) is about licenced crops and agribusiness. It'd be neat to read something similar about domestic DRM. http://www.nightshadebooks.com/Downloads/WindupStories.pdf http://www.nightshadebooks.com/Downloads/WindupStories.pdf

kcmarshall 12y ago
All of the stories in Bacigalupi's _The_Windup_Girl_ universe contain sub-plots about the 'Calorie Cartels' based in Iowa. Really good reading for a near-apocalyptic vision of a post-Oil, mid-climate crisis world. Full-on Trigger Warning for some of the sexual content in _The_Windup_Girl_ though.
nkurz 12y ago
Wow! You are right. This is an incredibly apt dystopian view of the future of DRM. Read it.

arcosdev 12y ago

We started drinking garbage coffee

ynniv 12y ago
Yes! If you care more about coffee and less about convenience you'll end up pouring freshly ground beans over hot water and there isn't a damn thing technology can do to interfere there.
- mcguire 12y ago
  Cough, cough, AeroPress[1], cough. It's almost as convenient for a single cup as Keurig, much cheaper, and if you've got a local coffee roaster, much, much better. [1] http://aerobie.com/products/aeropress.htm http://aerobie.com/products/aeropress.htm

icebraining 12y ago

Where did we go wrong? Had unreasonable expectations?

smackfu 12y ago

You watched different movies than I did.

forgottenpass 12y ago

Where did we go wrong? "Because money" is sufficient justification for actions in business that would otherwise be classified as sociopathic. This is fairly light in the grand scheme of things.

aaronem 12y ago

Did you expect not to need to be smart?

digi_owl 12y ago

Matter energy conversion didn't happen...

Someone1234 12y ago
And if/when it does you totally know you'll pay a licence fee for each "pattern" you materialise. I mean people pay over $1 for a Christmas card and the justification for that is "someone has to come up with the designs!"

chillingeffect 12y ago

> Where did we go wrong? Fantastic line of discussion! Glad you're bringing it up. We went wrong when we said, "We can have infinite possibilities, but only through >ME<." And then we cemented the deal when we went along with the "guy" who said, "You can only have infinite possibilities through >ME<." And we let it get worse when we rationalize the Keurig with bullshit like "Having a pot of coffee around is unsafe because of the burner, etc." Technology is a stand-in for relationships - what you would do for someone if you were there, but conveniently you've duplicated yourself via machine. We went wrong when we said, "Well, if I was there, I would prevent you from having coffee from a convenient machine." In reality you wouldn't - you would share as much as possible. However, when we replace ourselves with machines designed by greedy committees, we write ourselves out of the equation.

jchrome 12y ago
Not to mention that pouring boiling water through cheap plastic leaches industrial chemicals into our coffee, thereby increasing our chances of cancer. Plus Keurig tastes like a cup of monkey-poo. French press is the way to go (or iced coffee).

protonfish 12y ago

The flaw is thinking that technology alone can help people. If you created a machine that magically makes everyone the equivalent of a billionaire, but don't fix an imbalance of power - that certain people are allowed to take as much as they want from anyone with less power and privilege - then you have helped nobody. We first must fix the problem of authority.

ultramancool 12y ago

We went wrong when we discouraged hackers and competitors from doing this kind of thing. If this wasn't encouraged by government, products like the Keurig 2.0 would be broken quickly and soon after vanish. DRM should not be a viable business model. You want to prosecute copyright infringers, fine, that's one thing, but if you're attacking people who break DRM systems, that's quite another.

dhm 12y ago

I think it's important to at least acknowledge the desire a "razor/razorblades" device manufacturer has for maintaining the quality of their brand by controlling to some extent the user experiences that are possible with their tool. To me, this seems similar to Sony and Nintendo wanting the right to certify titles that run on their consoles. You can argue about whether removing freedom from the user is worth the trade for a reliable user experience, and you can argue about the right place to draw the quality line, but they're trying to guarantee a certain minimum level of user experience by doing this. If Keurig coffee was somehow astoundingly good out of their machine, with their pods, would we have less of a problem with what they are doing? What Keurig is doing also doesn't prevent another manufacturer from competing with an unencumbered alternative. Shouldn't we expect such a system to compete in the marketplace on its merits?

uxp 12y ago
> What Keurig is doing also doesn't prevent another manufacturer from competing with an unencumbered alternative Not sure if this fits the definition of irony, but Keurig is the company that came up with the unencumbered 1.0 coffee pod standard. The original DRM was the idea that a scoop of ground coffee beans was incompatible with the pod brewer. 2.0 is exactly the same, but with the RFID (I'm assuming. I haven't cared to look into it) "protection". I'd imagine 3.0 will have some kind of boolean logic much like inkjet cartridges have these days that will make the thing complain that the pod has already been used. Though, I entirely agree with you. This DRM is only present because Keurig wants to protect it's brand. It came up with the pod brewer concept, much like Apple came up with the iPhone and it's app store. Rejecting what it deems to be inferior or competitive to it's goals is it's objective. I'd wish everything was more open and available for interoperability, but it's their product up until I purchase it, so the design is out of my control.

squeaky-clean 12y ago

I suppose it's making Keurig's lives better. Infinite possibilities through the means of technology includes digitally protected coffee.

zackmorris 12y ago

A big ah hah moment for me was realizing that money is a representation of inefficiency. So for example, if everyone had a means of growing their own food, generating their own electricity, taking care of their own health, and had unlimited access to information, we wouldn't need to buy things or pay for services. A Mr. Fusion and a replicator would be all we needed. That’s probably the real reason they don’t use money on Star Trek. Not so much because they eliminated scarcity (which they obviously did, with numerous planets to choose from) but because giving everyone the basic means to sustain themselves was such a small fraction of the economy that it became dehumanizing to force people to work so much when society could provide for all within the percentage of a rounding error. This concept’s relevance for coffee makers: what’s a coffee maker without coffee? Anyone can brew coffee by pouring hot water through a sock (as it’s done in much of the developing world) and I can say from experience that it’s both more convenient and can even make a better cup. So the key is the coffee, not the machine. It’s not really surprising that Keurig wants to cement itself as a middleman, and since coffee is everywhere, it was probably inevitable that they’d turn to a DRM solution. Hydroponics, fabless photovoltaics and big data medicine are going to be what take us into the future, not some kitchen gismo. In fact, the more I witness “progress” in my lifetime, the more I see that the really revolutionary stuff like the internet is generally free and shared by all. Otherwise it just makes some guy rich. I want to be rich too, but I’ve spent half my life chasing a goal that wouldn’t even be necessary if I was off the grid and could just get left the heck alone.

merlincorey 12y ago
The internet is far from generally free and it is in danger of being shared by all (which of course this community is well aware of) by "fast lanes" and other detrimental laws motivated by middlemen who want money.
_Adam 12y ago
Money is just a tool humans use to represent value. It is up to us to decide what is valuable. It's not about efficiency or inefficiency. You can't alone create everything. Food, water, power, maybe. But what about designing something great and complex? You could argue people would do this for free, but that's not right. A designer isn't an emoting artist seeking to express some particular vision. A designer solves humanity's problems. There's usually lots of things we want to express, but we don't have time to express them all. The way we select the problem to solve is by evaluating the economic potential of it. In other words, money makes people solve problems other people care about. It's the fitness function of technological evolution.

keithpeter 12y ago

My future is not artifically limited through the means of technology. I use my trusty moka pot for decent coffee and instant when I'm on the run (I have no shame). Seriously: analogue for analogue things folks.