it's been said a trillion times but...

wildvine (and drm in general) needs to be outlawed.

inherently discriminatory and arguably evil bit of technology that needs to be outlawed off the face of the planet.

it's this sort of crap that sets technology back from its true potential.

@elliptic I don't know what wildvine this but DuckDuckGo image search gives me this:

@sjb ah damn it

i can't stop myself from typing 'wildvine' when i mean 'widevine' but you knew that when you memed me.

@elliptic I had no idea that existed. It means Netflix etc. won't work outside a select few browsers that have it installed? Well, the commercial video sites have been garbage in terms of standards for a while now...

@elliptic For some reason the name keeps reminding me of "blackwater". I shady organisations can be named according to the [innocuous adjective][natural object] scheme

@sjb instead of client-side drm, they could just as well do server-side watermarking (steganography) of content (if they're not already doing it) ... i mean, users log in and have to identify themselves that way, the client side DRM is just invasive, stupid and imo bordering on illegal.

@elliptic Unfortunately I think it's been this way for 20+ years. I remember video from Disney etc. would only play in RealPlayer or Windows Media Player back in the day.

But I've been noticing the quality of independent video increasing, while the big media outlets are going downhill if anything. Perhaps eventually the market will prefer content that doesn't have 1000 lawyers attached to it.

@sjb the lawyers in charge of content (the middlemen) will still largely be in control. things haven't changed that much.

streaming allowed for a way for content producers to grow. per capita spend on tv entertainment has gone up, not down.

i dunno where it's headed but i don't think it's drm-free anytime soon.

average person doesn't even know what drm is.

@sjb netflix for example makes it pretty overt in their terms that you grant them permission to probe your local network at will. hulu is as aggressive as that, if not more.

they're all moving in this direction where they are planting flags in your computing and network environment. your choice is: accept those terms or don't use the service.

@elliptic I don't use their services. There's funnier and more educational stuff on YouTube, which while maybe not DRM- or Google-free, is only one step away from uploading videos to an alternative platform. I even contribute to the creators' Patreon sometimes.

@sjb that may be.

think about podcasts. initially people did them without any monetization whatsoever.

now podcasts are massively monetized, riddled with ads, with many different distribution platforms, most with some form of drm, and then they may have patreon over the top of all that.

i'm not very optimistic that alternative models will succeed as much as the one we've been subjected to since the invention of radio.

@elliptic Oh yeah, some of the podcast "distribution platforms" are scams. And usually the content is garbage.

Just find someone who uploads stuff in a normal way. I don't necessarily mind creators making money via ads.

Also YouTube search for "<netflix series> is terrible" and similar and you'll get ample reason why that stuff is badly-written and rots your brain!

If I want to see a big budget film I usually (pre-2020) would go to the cinema, rather than infect myself with DRM.

@sjb well the thing is, you're already infected. a lot of youtube content won't play without widevine ... anything that is copyrighted or has been scanned (contentid) for copyrighted media -- and almost all subscription services that can work in a "standard" web browser -- depend on widevine.

google made drm a zero-cost feature for content producers and distributors to add.

there's not enough pushback from consumers about drm, and i doubt there ever will be.

imo, it's not gonna change much.

@sjb that said i'm not using any of those services on anything except a set-top box in its own vlan, if & when i do use them.

so from their point of view, i would be just like the majority of other content consumers.

if i decided to go run stuff in linux, it'd probably fail (the widevine activation) if i tried, and they wouldn't care if i complained about it.

if enough people complained about that use case (linux) -- it might change things, but we're a long ways off from that, if ever.

@elliptic I just disabled widevine on Firefox as per these instructions:

Certainly one of the YouTube shows I watch still plays fine. It'll be interesting to see if I run into anything that doesn't work.

@elliptic Level1Techs channel seems to work without DRM. Shadiversity too. I'll post here if I hit a roadblock anywhere

Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!