I guess I'll just pirate instead, Amazon...


  • area_can

    Found this on the internet (the No HD for you! text was edited on):

    alt text

    Does anyone seriously believe that this is easier than just going to TPB and downloading TV shows from there?


  • area_can

    Oh interesting...that little image preview thumbnail appears to just be an <img> pointing to the actual big image and scaled down in CSS. So I wonder what would happen if someone posted an <img> pointing to a 50MB image.


  • area_can

    Oh interesting...I disabled 'scroll to my post' in preferences and after I posted my last comment it refused to appear until I refreshed the page...



  • @bb36e said:

    So I wonder what would happen if someone posted an <img> pointing to a 50MB image.

    There would be an <img> pointing to a 50MB image. Not that difficult.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    TIL about HDCP. Also, WTF.



  • But if they didn't put DRM in their service, someone would just save the videos and share them on a torrent site, and then people would be able to pirate their series.

    Whereas now it's obviously impossible to do that.



  • @bb36e hdcp is some kind of a drm thing?



  • @cartman82
    Yeah, HDCP is a DRM thing. It's similar to SSL, and is used to ensure that you haven't tampered with the video output chain. Consumer level HDCP compliant devices can't make copies, and HDCP compliant players refuse to play HD unless the whole chain is HDCP compliant.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    The silly thing is that most people don't really care all that much whether the content is HD or not. They're interested in the show, not the technology used to move it around.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @Captain said:

    @cartman82
    Yeah, HDCP is a DRM thing. It's similar to SSL, and is used to ensure that you haven't tampered with the video output chain. Consumer level HDCP compliant devices can't make copies, and HDCP compliant players refuse to play HD unless the whole chain is HDCP compliant.

    Yeah. I had heard of the idea, but I didn't think it was actually a thing yet...

    This... This right here? Its why we can't have nice things.



  • @sloosecannon And that's just one of the three DRM systems Blu-ray discs have!

    Filed under: 09 F9 11..


  • area_can



  • @dkf Actually, I'm pretty sure they care if the picture looks nice.

    HDCP is the technology used to move it around, but HD is the resolution the movie is in.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @powerlord said:

    Actually, I'm pretty sure they care if the picture looks nice.

    Not nearly as much as they care that the content is of the right show.



  • Back in my day all our CP was in regular definition.



  • @bb36e Only those who think that the Police are keylogging their brain. Remotely. Using Chemtrails that allow HAARP to send the signals that can get through their tinfoil hat.

    Meanwhile, everyone else figures the police have better things to do, like handing out parking tickets and shooting men who committed the crime of belonging to an underprivileged minority.

    Oops, did I say that last part out loud? fnord.

    Filed Under: The real joke, of course, is thinking that any amount of public outrage at casual racism (when it is someone other than the outraged protester doing it), incompetence, and bad luck can do anything but compound the problem, but WTH...



  • @ScholRLEA Cynicism, meanwhile, is a proven panacea.


  • area_can



  • @anonymous234 I think I've seen people selling HDMI to DVI converters that claims will not disable the HDCP capabilities.

    This, IMO, is just one more nonsense on "try to punish your paying customers".



  • @cheong That's possible. The master keys were leaked years ago, which means this HDCP-thingie is now just annoying, but doesn't do a thing against "piracy".



  • In the UK we have "Now TV" which doesn't work on Chrome because of Silverlight. It is easier for me to go to the putlocker to show the same content. Also if you watch content that isn't as popular, a lot of the time it doesn't work correctly i.e. Game of Thrones always works, however I quite like a lot of content on Discovery which isn't nearly as popular ... it doesn't work.

    Why does it the content require silverlight because it has to be MKV / MP4 to work on the chromecast anyway.



  • @martijntje said:

    @cheong That's possible. The master keys were leaked years ago, which means this HDCP-thingie is now just annoying, but doesn't do a thing against "piracy".

    No DRM ever could stop "piracy", simply because there is no way to prevent sufficiently determined attacker with physical access to a device from gaining full control over it. So the only thing DRM does is pissing customers off. And a pissed customer is going to go to TPB next time.



  • @Bulb said:

    no way to prevent sufficiently determined attacker with physical access to a device from gaining full control over it.

    Don't say that, you'll upset the crypto-anarchists.



  • @cheong hdcp was designed to work over dvi. My first 1200p monitor had only dvi, and was selected specifically to have hdcp.


  • area_deu

    @sloosecannon said:

    Yeah. I had heard of the idea, but I didn't think it was actually a thing yet...

    Really? Microsoft implementing it was one of the most-disliked things about Windows Vista, IIRC.



  • @Buddy said:

    Don't say that, you'll upset the crypto-anarchists.

    I would think the crypto-anarchists, at least those not totally stupid, know that already.

    Also note, that the full control does not include decrypting already encrypted information if the key, or part of it, is not present on the device (hence the recent Apple affair). However, for any kind of DRM, the key must be present on the device and thus available for physical extraction (you can also make a tamper-evident device, but pirates don't mind if they destroy the device as long as they manage to extract the key).


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Bulb said:

    However, for any kind of DRM, the key must be present on the device and thus available for physical extraction

    To be fair, when you've got a system that is pretty much guaranteed to be online, you can do things with session keys and media that are encrypted so as to only be readable on that device (this would be imperfect, but much stronger than most current DRM). That doesn't work nearly so well with offline systems, or broadcast or mass produced media, which need the same key to be used by many devices. It also puts much more computing load on the delivery systems, reducing the profit margins quite a bit there.



  • @lucas1 wasn't ITV player (Or is it still?) Silverlight? I remember having trouble streaming world cup games. Also, because ITV has regional broadcasting, UTV weren't showing games on the web player so I had to go to the ITV player and tell them my postcode was Luton because anything under "BTXX" counts as Belfast and redirects you automatically. Even though the game was broadcast on actual UTV.



  • @dkf You can do whatever you want with session keys, but the device has to be identified with some key and as long as the key is stored in the device (which for DRM it has to be), physical access to it allows you to extract it and impersonate the device. It might be again harder for the pirates, and it might allow tracking down which device they disassembled, but it is not stopping them. And tracking down is easily avoided with strawperson.



  • @thegoryone

    Yes the ITV player was horrific (iPlayer of course worked fine and I could watch the matches in HD) for the World Cup.

    The EuroSport player (I watch the major cycle tours and the Spring Classics) was similarly horrible due to a shitty Silverlight player, to the point it was actually better watching the pirate feeds than paying £10 a month.



  • I think we can all generally agree that data encryption, regardless of its purpose or its method, is an example of Imperial nudism at it's finest. Allowing a computer to access and manipulate data within it while preventing it from doing the same with the same data at some other time is in direct contradiction to the nature of any computing system. Encryption (and computer security in general) is at best a useful lie, and at worst creates a false sense of security.

    While it is often useful to pretend that we can unbreakably encrypt something in a usable (i.e., reversible, when given the key) manner, the fact remains that any discrete, sequential cipher algorithm can be overcome eventually. The best anyone can do is make it impractical to do so in a reasonable amount of time, but what is feasible is a moving target, especially as better parallel hardware becomes available as stock equipment, and software to operate it at something close to its maximum potential gets (eventually) written. I cannot say that quantum encryption might not be a different matter, but we are still years if not decades before stock hardware based on QC is available publicly.



  • Official Site always easier than pirating.



  • @Nagesh said:

    Official Site always easier than pirating.

    Please tell me that I am hallucinating right now.

    All right, who left the summoning circle unattended? Gotta go clean the brimstone up again...


  • Impossible Mission Players - A

    @ScholRLEA said:

    Please tell me that I am hallucinating right now.

    You are hallucinageneticing right now~



  • This post is deleted!


  • @fbmac said:

    What strikes me as most ridiculous with dhcp and drm is that the typical torrent user isn't affected by it, and the distributors aren't even slowed down. We're annoyed so the studios can feel someone is doing something about it.

    The nice thing about dhcp is that it lets me connect multiple devices to my wireless router without having to manually assign each one an IP address.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @ben_lubar said:

    @fbmac said:

    What strikes me as most ridiculous with dhcp and drm is that the typical torrent user isn't affected by it, and the distributors aren't even slowed down. We're annoyed so the studios can feel someone is doing something about it.

    The nice thing about dhcp is that it lets me connect multiple devices to my wireless router without having to manually assign each one an IP address.

    Apparently, dhcp != hdcp



  • @sloosecannon if we were still handing out badges, I'd petition to give you one that read "congratulations, you got the joke"


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @ben_lubar said:

    congratulations, you gotkilled the joke

    FTFY?

    Also, take a like for your signature...



  • @ben_lubar hey, that post was deleted


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @fbmac said:

    @ben_lubar hey, that post was deleted

    Oh well

    :P


  • Impossible Mission Players - A

    @fbmac said:

    hey, that post was deleted

    Ya gotta be quicker than that!

    0_1458622565989_upload-8542f747-6d9f-4bac-a33d-41401c39ea0a



  • @fbmac said:

    @ben_lubar hey, that post was deleted

    My wheelchair makes me immune to @fbmac's powers.


    Filed under: jokes that won't make sense after another migration



  • This post is deleted!

  • mod

    @fbmac My favorite thing about being a mod in NodeBB is still getting to read deleted posts still in context. I barely even notice :)


  • :belt_onion:

    @Yamikuronue Well, good for you, but it's shouting at the rest of us. Why are deleted posts so rude to us regular users? :frowning2:



  • @ScholRLEA said:

    I think we can all generally agree that data encryption, regardless of its purpose or its method, is an example of Imperial nudism at it's finest. Allowing a computer to access and manipulate data within it while preventing it from doing the same with the same data at some other time is in direct contradiction to the nature of any computing system. Encryption (and computer security in general) is at best a useful lie, and at worst creates a false sense of security.

    While it is often useful to pretend that we can unbreakably encrypt something in a usable (i.e., reversible, when given the key) manner, the fact remains that any discrete, sequential cipher algorithm can be overcome eventually. The best anyone can do is make it impractical to do so in a reasonable amount of time, but what is feasible is a moving target, especially as better parallel hardware becomes available as stock equipment, and software to operate it at something close to its maximum potential gets (eventually) written. I cannot say that quantum encryption might not be a different matter, but we are still years if not decades before stock hardware based on QC is available publicly.

    I'm sorry, but this is just wrong. To brute-force an AES-256 key(using the special AES opcodes, no less) on 3Ghz processors, you need 5*10^61 processor-years(plusminus). If each 3Ghz processor was the size of a single atom, and you made an entire planet out of just these atoms, it'd be bigger than the earth(1.4 times the size, actually). Such a computer-planet would need 10 billion years to brute-force an AES key.

    If you used regular earth processors there is not enough energy in the universe(including mass-converted-to-energy, before you ask) to brute-force an AES key. There is a place where impractical becomes impossible, and if you ask me it's when you start running out of universe.

    This doesn't apply to DRM because the whole point of DRM is to show you the content. It's a war of attrition but one side doesn't pay salaries.


  • mod

    @Yamikuronue said:

    @fbmac My favorite thing about being a mod in NodeBB is still getting to read deleted posts still in context. I barely even notice :)

    Still, sometimes I get so tempted to use this handy tool:

    0_1458775704036_upload-d3560bc4-fe42-4cbb-a21a-264378b3b45b



  • @fbmac said (then deleted):

    What strikes me as most ridiculous with dhcp and drm is that the typical torrent user isn't affected by it, and the distributors aren't even slowed down. We're annoyed so the studios can feel someone is doing something about it.

    That's why those really sophisticated DRM schemes don't work. Yes, you can actually make it harder to copy something, but it takes literally one person to do the work of stripping the copy protection out, and then everyone else can just download it as a normal video (or in case of software, a modified .exe).

    However, just a tiny bit of inconvenience can stop most casual users from copying a file for their friends. Which is why I can understand content creators adding basic DRM to videos or software. But anything beyond that is folish.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.