Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   hexaheximal (hexaheximal@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 27-Jul-2023 14:20:17 JST hexaheximal

   • Asahi Linya (朝日りにゃ〜)

   @lina There is a simple reason why this doesn't work:

   YOU CAN NEVER TRUST THE CLIENT.

   It's as simple as that. I have no idea why people keep thinking they can find a way to make the client trustworthy. That's just not how it works.

   • Embed this notice
     clacke (clacke@libranet.de)'s status on Thursday, 27-Jul-2023 14:20:16 JST clacke

     in reply to

     • Asahi Linya (朝日りにゃ〜)

     @hexaheximal @lina DRM was never about making it impossible. They know it doesn't work. The point is to (1) make it inconvenient and (2) turn users defending their own interests into felony contempt of business model.

     See de-CSS, youtube-dl, invidious

   • Embed this notice
     clacke (clacke@libranet.de)'s status on Thursday, 27-Jul-2023 14:31:16 JST clacke

     in reply to

     You and I can use various ungoogled Chromiums and Gecko browsers. Most people won't. And if our "alternative" browsers try to impersonate their DRM identity it will be construed as a copyright violation and a security threat and the github repo will be taken down.

     Don't host your stuff on github. Also fight the DRMed web.

   • Embed this notice
     clacke (clacke@libranet.de)'s status on Thursday, 27-Jul-2023 14:55:04 JST clacke

     in reply to

     Thank you Jay Freeman for the term.

     pluralistic.net/2022/10/20/ben…

   • Embed this notice
     hexaheximal (hexaheximal@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 27-Jul-2023 21:28:25 JST hexaheximal

     in reply to

     • clacke

     @clacke I thought they specifically said that it isn't DRM, doesn't restrict content, and would even temporarily disable itself sometimes to force websites to have to support not having it.

     See: https://github.com/RupertBenWiser/Web-Environment-Integrity/issues/28#issuecomment-1646083436b and https://github.com/RupertBenWiser/Web-Environment-Integrity/issues/28#issuecomment-1651129388

   • Embed this notice
     clacke (clacke@libranet.de)'s status on Thursday, 27-Jul-2023 21:28:25 JST clacke

     in reply to

     @hexaheximal yeah that's believable

     /s

   • Embed this notice
     hexaheximal (hexaheximal@mastodon.social)'s status on Friday, 28-Jul-2023 01:37:39 JST hexaheximal

     in reply to

     • clacke

     @clacke What is the problem with that?

   • Embed this notice
     clacke (clacke@libranet.de)'s status on Friday, 28-Jul-2023 01:37:39 JST clacke

     in reply to

     @hexaheximal First, this is a draft. We'll see if that "[let's try to defeat the real purpose of this spec]" clause will stick.

     Maybe the people who wrote the spec believe themselves, but this weird sometimes-no-DRM thing is not what their bosses want.

     Second, let's say they do put it in. And Chrome does implement it. Some sites won't bother to implement this weird intermittent mode.

     Then some users will complain that the browser behaves differently 10% of the time. That's terrible usability. And then they'll rip it out regardless what the spec says they SHOULD do.

     When I have more energy I will read this again and try to understand how it's even described to work in theory. It was a confusing read.