From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S263635AbTDYTAo (ORCPT <rfc822;willy@w.ods.org>);
	Fri, 25 Apr 2003 15:00:44 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263643AbTDYTAo
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Fri, 25 Apr 2003 15:00:44 -0400
Received: from mail.jlokier.co.uk ([81.29.64.88]:38536 "EHLO
	mail.jlokier.co.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263635AbTDYTAn
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 25 Apr 2003 15:00:43 -0400
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 20:12:53 +0100
From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
To: Andreas Jellinghaus <aj@dungeon.inka.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Flame Linus to a crisp!
Message-ID: <20030425191252.GA1853@mail.jlokier.co.uk>
References: <170EBA504C3AD511A3FE00508BB89A9201FD91E8@exnanycmbx4.ipc.com> <20030424212811.GH30082@mail.jlokier.co.uk> <20030425081358.B750C2128A@dungeon.inka.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20030425081358.B750C2128A@dungeon.inka.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
> > Also that day, that same article doesn't load from Al-Jazeera or
> > anywhere else, on the PC you bought from the only affordable store in
> > town. 
> 
> ah, myth. please dig into the tcpa spec and quote where you find
> anything that provides substance for that. possible? even today without
> tcpa or DRM or anything like that.

<paranoid>
There is nothing in the tcpa spec, they'd be foolish to put the _real_
agenda in the spec wouldn't they? :)
</paranoid>

> but why does DRM or TCPA make this easier or harder to work around?

Because the only kernels that ISPs accept connections from are signed
and encrypted by the computer vendor - which means you _cannot_ trust
those kernels to not contain back doors.

> if we could asure that DRM would only be used in 0.1% of all computer
> uses, then banks and stuff could use it, maybe even that digitial video
> rental using the internet (they already do, but without hardware
> support), and everyone else will not. I don't see the problem with
> some uses, but with everyone using it.

The question is, if it is widely implemented in available hardware,
_will_ everyone be using it whether they want to or not?

Also, what about the law?  Remember, there have been attempts in the
last year, in the US, to legislate DRM into all computers.

-- Jamie