Posted on 06/28/2002 8:09:49 AM PDT by RicocheT
Palladium and the "Fritz Chip"
You all should know about Senator Fritz Hollings, and his tireless attempts to make PCs incapable of copying music files or running "unauthorized content". The Trusted Computing Platform Alliance" or TCPA, is a hardware and software based system for preventing computers from doing many of the things they are now capable of. Microsoft, AMD, Intel and many other companies say they are now working very hard to integrate TCPA features into hardware and software, including future versions of Windows.
At the heart of TCPA is a new chip added to motherboards, which have been affectionately dubbed "Fritz chips" after the good Senator. But there is a double meaning here, since you can expect computers based on TCPA technology to go on the fritz far more often than their non-TCPA counterparts. Eventually, Intel and AMD say they will incorporate TCPA into future processors. Lucky us.
Palladium is the software end of the business, and will be built-into future versions of Windows. The basic idea is that the Fritz chip will constantly check the machine state, and the "authorizations" for the OS and each application on the machine. The OS will only boot if nothing is "amiss", that means no "unauthorized components or content". The spin they are putting on this draconian move is that "PCs won't necessarily get faster, just more secure".
Is that what computer owners want? Slower computers that can't copy MP3 files without paid authorization? I don't think so, and I doubt that talk about "secure computing" will change many minds. So the question is, will folks run out to buy a "Fritz chip" computer, or will they shop around for Fritz-less options? My guess is the later. However, most computer users are far from techno-savvy, so if they get bombarded with propaganda about TCPA making their computers secure from hackers, maybe the IT industry will be able to bamboozle large numbers of casual computer users. But the relatively smaller community of power users will certainly not go quietly into this good fight. So the next question is, will there be "Fritz-less" computer manufacturers that specifically sell only systems that have no TCPA components or operating systems? What will become of Linux as Microsoft moves completely to "Palladium", especially if the internet becomes TCPA-ified?
The bottom line is this. Computer and software makers are desperate to lock down the ability of modern computers until they are nothing more than paid content providing systems. This is not what computers were made for, they were made to be multifunctional, programmable devices with almost unlimited capabilities. Capabilities that the MPAA (motion picture assoc. of America) and RIAA (recording industry assoc. of America) want eliminated ASAP.
Finally, will TCPA create a black market for Fritz-less motherboards, or will it just make the last, fastest, Fritz-less computers the most popular on earth? I can imagine a big run on the last round on non-TCPA hardware as soon as it becomes known that all motherboards after a certain date must have the Fritz chip installed.
Dr. John
See this article for the technical explanation: "MS Palladium protects IT vendors, not you" http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/25940.html
Bzzzt. Wrong. I burn a CD, I give it to you without taking money, and I am within the Betamax decision's definition of fair use. Simply lending it is even more within bounds.
Now ask yourself: Why is this fair use? One of the reasons is that any means to stop it is simply too intrusive and unenforceable.
Or how about FR's server logs? They probably have enough record of government shills like you that if someone were to crack FR and take them they could track you down. Better shut down FR before that happens!
I will continue to resist that end-state, and will enjoy my freedom for as long as I can.
You wouldn't know the difference between principled objections to arbitrary restraints on individual rights and a libertine desire to legalize something from personal desire to partake of it.
The only reason why you want a car capable of doing more than 55mph is because you want to speed.
Kevin, how much do you know about software and hardware development? If you don't, then shut up. You have no idea what you're talking about.
IF YOU THINK THIS CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED WITHOUT IRREPARABLY DESTROYING THE WAY THAT A PERSONAL COMPUTER WORKS STFU NOW! YOU OBVIOUSLY HAVE NO EXPERIENCE WRITING SOFTWARE OR BUILDING HARDWARE BECAUSE IF YOU DID YOU WOULD KNOW THAT THIS WOULD NEVER WORK!
Piracy for profit is clearly out of bounds, and always should be. On that we can agree. It is also easier to find: If is generates big profits, there is a bank account somewhere that can be siezed.
Where we part ways is this: I find the security of my documents and the ability to operate a machine I own as I see fit more important than anyone else's ability to profit from IP in the face of not-for-profit sharing, especially if the only way to stop that sharing is to install Big Brother Inside, even if it means the end of the RIAA and it's constituents.
No, many of us will go firmly into Apple's camp. Apple wouldn't dare implement something like this because it knows its core userbase would go berzerk. That's the advantage that we Mac users have, we have Apple by the balls to a degree that PC users could never have Dell, HPQ, Intel, etc. Without us, Apple is dead as a company. We are the users that went out and bought OSX 10.0 knowing it was actually 10-beta2 and 10.1 was the true "1.0" release of OSX. We are the users that opt for the more expensive hardware that is Apple's bread and butter. Simply put, Apple's core contingency is what has always kept it relatively safe and always will. Unless Apple is forced to by law, they will not implement something like Palladium because their core userbase would rip Jobs a new one.
Palladium is not the answer anymore than motion detector-enabled cameras are an answer to speeding problems. Palladium cannot and will not solve the issue of bootlegging. Have you been under a rock for the past 5-6 years? All it takes is for a team of gifted crackers to crack 1 copy of the restricted content and once it starts propagating it will be impossible to stop. The only way to stop that from happening would be to shut down the Internet because it cannot exist as both an open communications medium and be heavily regulated to protect the assets of certain industries. It is one way or another. You cannot have DRM and have the existing Internet and computer platforms coexist.
The fact of the matter is that the RIAA's losses are totally their own fault. Napster was only a symptom of a greater disease. The fact of the matter is that the major labels have the means to simultaneously cut the cost of their products by 50%, give every artist a 50% cut from the CD and still make several dollars in profit per CD, but they won't rock the boat. I won't entertain the thought of having any sympathy or any concern for the workers, executives and stockholders of these multinationals until they actually reform themselves. They have the means to produce all of their CDs inhouse and sell them directly online to customers for $10 including S&H. Rather than killing Napster they should have bought Napster and then use it as a front end for their eCommerce sites so that every search in Napster would let a Napster user buy the CD online directly from the label for $6-$8 before S&H.
Bootlegging is non-issue. Microsoft's products are the most heavily bootlegged IP in the world, both commercially and for personal use yet Microsoft is one of the wealthiest institutions on Earth. Microsoft disproves the **AA's argument that bootlegging kills market-oriented IP companies. Microsoft's products are never as bad as the majority of movies put out by Hollywood. Microsoft also learns its lessons very quickly after being hit the first time. The other major IP companies such as Universal-Vivendi, Sony, etc do not. Jack Valenti complained that only 2/10 of the movies put out are highly profitable. No $hit you jackass, most of them are not memorable and are cookie-cutter trash. Every other industry seems to understand that flooding the market with cheap trash is not good for the bottom line, the music and movie industries won't figure that out until after their own policies kill them off.
In the end I think the one company that will profit the most from this issue is Paypal. Eventually some big name artist is going to realize that a paypal account let's fans bootleg albums to their hearts' content and actually pay them directly. It will all be down hill from their for the financial vampires that make up the majority of the music industry.
Every PC user keeps saying Apple is dead or dying. Guess what, it hasn't happened. The PC market is consolidating now because it is having a hard time remaining profitable. How much profit can HPaq or Dell make on their typical systems? At my university, most of the PC users opt for the low end. You know what that means don't you... profits are lower and the users will still be expecting the same kind of tech support that people who opt for the high end hardware get. HPQ's future in the UNIX market is questionable and Dell has a terrible relationship with most Linux users because they feel gipped since Dell touted the RHLinux option on certain systems but made it quite difficult to find the part on the store that allowed you to buy them. A lot of Linux users are being converted to OSX becuase it just works as a desktop and its UNIX side lets us still be geeks. One of my best friends from high school and I are perfect examples. I know some other *NIX users that are warming up to OS X as well. If OSX can convert us, it can convert average joe blows who are sick and tired of the same old, same old from Redmond.
YES PALLADIUM ISN'T THE ANSWER, NEITHER IS FRITZ, NEITHER WILL SOLVE THE PROBLEM. But guess what, they're what's coming down the pipe. Not just from companies from probably from the law. Unless somebody comes up with a better answer.
It isn't inevitable. The CBDTPA was shot in the head this year by DigitalConsumer.org's campaign against it. If you oppose it and haven't gone to their site, do it. They have a small letter they'll fax everyone who represents you on paper in Congress telling them you don't like it. If the CBDTPA comes around again, help DC.org get even more people to send the faxes out. They sent out 35,000 letters just this year during the few weeks where it was an issue!
It is not the government's place to make market transitions easy. If a business is outmoded or cannot work it must die. God help us if Enron is bailed out with tax payers' money. The solution is to find a way to get a company like Paypal to get their service integrated into AOL, Compuserve, Earthlink's software and everywhere that would attract consumer attention. That way people could send micropayments to artists. That is the solution. That and prosecuting users who mass-bootleg. Don't quibble over the meaning of mass-bootleg. Anyone that is sending a few gigs of 128-160k mp3s out a month falls into that category. DSL and Cable internet service providers have more than enough technical resources to flag users whose upstream hits that much or more in 1 month. Once they hit 500mb, start logging every outgoing connection and run it through a perl script to see what data was being sent. A friend of mine said that he could easily have done that when he was working at my school's unix lab.
How much cheaper could the products be if MS was actually paid for all the copies of its software?
It wouldn't be $.01 cheaper. The majority of Microsoft's markets aren't threatened by bootlegging. The corporate market and the OEM markets are its bread and butter. Corporate customers can face millions of dollars in legal damages if they don't pay up. People who get their Microsoft software from OEMs make up the other large market for their software. Those markets only get hit on a large scale if a shipment of bootlegs gets mixed up in an official OEM shipment or a corporate software reseller sells bootlegs to unwitting corporate clients.
How much higher the dividends to the stockholder?
What dividends from MSFT? The company just announced that they won't even consider dividends for their shareholders. Talk about shafting the shareholders. The company has $40B in its bank accounts and continues to build on that. They are richer than most financial institutions according to IIRC Business 2.0.
The internet distribution method that all the napterites worship WILL NOT WORK. It CANNOT be profitable for an artist. If it had any chance in the world of being profitable, somebody would be doing it already.
Except for one problem, it cannot be done legally since an artist cannot consent to the distribution. They aren't the copyright holder if they have signed with a label.
Unless you have both a physical product that people can see in WalMart and the deep pockets necessary to feed that machine you aren't going to achieve the level of sales needed to be considered even a remote success.
You are considered a failure if you don't sell at least 1M records. As a guy from the Juliana Theory said, you're considered a successful indie band if you can sell 100,000 copies. If you aren't a Pearl Jam, a Live, a Creed, a Korn or an Incubus, you cannot get very "successful" under the current model. A simplified paypal-liked system would do the trick. Who the hell is stingy enough to not send $1 for a few songs they like to an artist? Not many people. Before you get into a rant about publicizing the songs, take a look at the success of the Blaire Witch Project.
One would think that after twenty-one solid years of making this argument every single day and never having it come anywhere close to true, the Apple-bashers would get the hint.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.