Hello, I'm just someone who is monitoring this list to see how it progresses and awaiting the release of the asic-card. I wish you good luck and I hope that the card will be plug-and-play in linux and that you don't have to fear that an upgrade of ther kernel will break you graphic-driver. It's little off-topic for this mailinglist maybe, but anyway...
Op maandag 5 juni 2006 14:43, schreef Hamish Marson: > Zan Lynx wrote: > > On Sun, 2006-06-04 at 15:06 +0100, Dieter wrote: > >>> Then there is the pragmatic point of view, let's say the > >>> Linus=20 principle, that there's nothing wrong with technology, > >>> and that DRM has=20 good uses as well, so why not support it > >>> and let other people figure=20 out whether they want to use it > >>> for good or for bad. > >> > >> Good uses for DRM? What would these be? > > > > Pretty obvious, really. > > > > There's two kinds of useful DRM. DRM that works for you, and > > there's is DRM that works for other people. You probably don't > > *like* the second kind, but it is certainly still useful, to > > *other* people. It can be useful to you too, if you have > > information that you want to restrict. > > > > Say you have hardware with the ability to limit code execution to > > signed binaries. You have the private key to sign those binaries. > > On the same machine? > > > Malicious code is pretty much impossible at that point although in > > such a strict mode it would also shut down JIT interpreters. > > Hmm.. I wouldn't say impossible... If the signing is avilable on the > same machine, then it just needs a backdoor (e.g. a handy security > hole) access to the process that does the signing to enable the > malicious code to be signed & away they go... > > > Or say you have confidential legal documents. With DRM they can be > > restricted to display by authorized document viewing software, > > only on authorized computer hardware, or on hardware with an > > authorized personal key loaded. > > Hmm... Sounds like a rewording of the RIAA et al's excuses for DRM to > me... > > > The US DoD has been using these sorts of limits on classified > > information stored in TCSEC Class B secure computer systems for a > > long time now. > > They've never heard of cameras then? Full circle... Spying would be > reduced to finding the doc & photographing them with a 007 style > mini-camera again... I have read that when you'll display a video in the future on your tv, there will be information encoded in the broadcast. I don't remember how they do it, but it seems similar to 2D-barcodes I think. I once read about them and I thought they allow you to put digital information in a picture for example. The point is that you a camera can read this information and won't allow you to record the picture. Ofcourse, if in your case, they may have a camera that isn't equiped with this blocking-technology. > > Seems to me they'd be better off solving the problem another way. > > H > > DRM seems to be ok as long as the user can control it. I was recently looking for a motherboard and it was TPM 1.2-compatibable I think. The new amd-processors (don't know about intel-processors) have "presidio"-technologio on them which is (quite) equivalent to tpm. I hope I can use it to accelerate encryption-operations (vpn, harddisk-encryption, ...), but I don't have enough information to know if it could be usefull for these operations. The paranoia in me :) also wants to know if the operations, that are executed by the hardware, don't include backdoors for agencies or so. > _______________________________________________ > Open-graphics mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics > List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com) Greetings, Michel
pgpMIGYhQMKT5.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
