A collection of current events, technology, sports, and miscellaneous rants

DefectiveByDesign.org recently published an article entitled “The decade of DRM.” Included among the events were four events prior to 2000 that would set the stage for the introduction and proliferation of DRM (digital restrictions management), arguably one of the biggest steps backward for computing freedom ever.

Even as far back as 2000, a lot of devices that we do not ordinarily think of as computers are in fact exactly that. Television sets, VCRs, CD players, DVD players, portable audio players, mobile phones, copiers, printers, scanners, fax machines, and the list goes on; all of these have computers (microprocessor-based logic) built into them somewhere. In 1980, this was unheard of, but now, it’s a fact of life. I still remember my late grandfather’s rants about these new cars with “all this computer [excrement]” that made them much more difficult to fix.

We have yet to change one thing, and it’s probably one thing that should not be changed. Computers are still, by themselves, incredibly dumb. One would think this, by itself, would discourage widespread adoption of DRM. Sadly, this is not the case.

The recording industry (RIAA) has realized DRM is not in their best interests. However movies, e-books, and cable television continue to be saddled with obnoxious restrictions. It’s often said that locks only keep honest people honest, and this is the same with DRM which is just a cyberspace equivalent of a fancy padlock. Those who do not respect copyright or draconian laws like the DMCA will crack the DRM and share anyway. CSS (not the stylesheet language, the DVD encryption method) was cracked very on in the lifespan of the DVD format. The Blu-Ray AACS key has been changed several times, and it just gets cracked again and again. Copies of these movies, as well as scans of books in PDF form, are easily obtainable on peer-to-peer file sharing networks and sites.

Meanwhile, people who have legitimately paid for video and audio recordings get unwelcome surprises when license servers disappear and they try to play recordings they “own” on a new computer. (The term “own” and “ownership” is kind of pointless with DRM, as even if one still has a copy of the recording, it can be rendered useless on an arbitrary basis. It’s like having a CD, DVD, or book that can just vanish or turn to dust without warning.) Don’t believe me? Ask these baseball fans who got bitten by MLB’s change in DRM licensing servers. Or the many people who bought into Microsoft’s PlaysForSure DRM scheme.

Perhaps the worst example, however, is when Amazon reached in to thousands of Kindle e-book readers it sold and erased copies of George Orwell’s book 1984, back in 2009 July. The content of the book itself makes the message even more chilling than it would otherwise have been.

DRM is an anti-social technology and I feel it is out of place in a world where “social media” is the new buzzword. The sooner it dies, the better.

First the UCSD incident, and now this.

Several news reports, most notably KMBC, kansascity.com, the Columbia Missourian, and this picture from theroot.com detail an incident at the University of Missouri where someone (assumably a pair of students) litters the area in front of the Gaines/Oldham Black Culture Center with cotton balls. For those that don’t get what makes this racist, it’s a reference to picking cotton as slave labor.

From the kansascity.com article:

Cotton balls were strewn across the [Gaines/Oldham] center’s lawn, walkway and bushes between 1:30 and 2:30 a.m. Police said two people were seen running from the center grounds.

To their credit, the university’s staff are taking this seriously, and held a town hall meeting on the Monday night following this Friday morning incident. Jessica Silverman posted an account of this meeting to her Twitter account (skip directly to tweets about the town hall meeting). For the impatient, I’ll summarize the key points below:

• Tim Noce, the MSA president, connecting this to not only the UCSD “Compton cookout” incident but also a UT incident against the LGBTQ community.
• Michael Middleton, Deputy Chancellor, stating the entire university has been offended, and cracking a joke of questionable taste.
• Roger Worthington, chief of diversity with MU police, who briefed the attendees on the investigation and mentioned talking to the FBI in Kansas City. “This was a hostile act against University of Missouri… We should respond as one Mizzou to this incident.”
• Student concerns about lack of funding for security cameras, lack of black faculty (MU lost 9 black faculty members in the last 3 years), and cutting funding for the Black Culture Center.

Indeed, as reported in The Maneater and the Columbia Missorian since I began writing this post, the students suspected of involvement (identified as Zachary Tucker and Sean Fitzgerald) have been arrested on charges of tampering in the second degree, and at least temporarily suspended from the university. As it turns out, there is a provision in the Missouri state law for enhancing this particular charge to a class D felony, punishable by up to 4 years in prison and a fine up to $5,000 (normally, second-degree tampering is usually only a class A misdemeanor, punishable by up to 1 year in jail and a $1,000 fine).

My take on this? I’m quite horrified that this type of action would take place in 2010. We, as a society, need to make a stand together and say that there is no room for this type of egregious, vile, and putrid intolerance. I’m frightened that someone considering a military career (both were in the Navy ROTC program), entrusted with the protection of our country, would dare to be involved in a senseless show of bigotry.

I saw at least one comment (on the story at The Maneater) expressing the belief a felony charge is too harsh:

9:18 a.m., March 6, 2010

Wm. Fred. Moore said:

I think that it’s way overkill to sock these guys with a felony! Unless they’ve demonstrated that they’re guilty of worse than the cotton ball prank,give them some reorientation and let them continue to grow at M.U.

(There were others expressing a similar sentiment, but I think this one is the most illustrative.)

And I disagree completely. I think given the circumstances, this overt act of disrespect and hate for human beings based primarily on skin color is felonious. I hope that by making an example of the students involved in this incident that it will deter others from such egregious acts.

I concede that they have a right to their view. Vandalism was an entirely inappropriate way to go about expressing it, and as such should be dealt with severely.

A recent article on the Equal Justice Society’s blog details a rather nauseating tale of intolerance at the University of California, San Diego (USCD).

From the article:

African American students at UC San Diego were shocked and demoralized by a “Compton Cookout” that took place this past Monday February 15.

According to the Facebook invitation, students from several fraternities organized this party in honor of Black History Month, inviting guests to “experience the various elements of life in the ghetto.”

And further on:

After protests from the Black Student Union and African American students on campus, on the evening of February 18, 2010, several students broke into the university-funded television station SR-TV in support of the Compton cookout, calling the African American community “ungrateful [racial slur].” Upon investigation of the program host’s media offices, the campus discovered a note on the studio floor with the words “Compton lynching.”

(The original is uncensored; I can’t bring myself to actually publish that word on my blog.)

I’m horrified that anyone, anywhere, deems this acceptable conduct. This kind of thing is absolutely, positively vile and putrid beyond redemption.

USCD now has a huge black mark on its reputation, especially in light of the fact the same group has planned another “Compton Cookout” this month–proving it’s not just a one-time mockery of Black History Month.

This is clearly hate speech and to allow it to persist makes places like USCD a lot worse. I hope the administration squashes this kind of overtly hateful act and fully sanctions those reponsible. At minimum, and only if there are massively mitigating circumstances, the culprits should be put on disciplinary probation and required to attend counseling. A far more appropriate response would be long-term suspensions or even expulsions from the university.

Normally I relish the opportunity to roast large companies like Google and hold them accountable. In this case, however, no sane person can possibly side with Google’s opponent, the Italian government, in this case.

This TechCrunch story links to a post on the official Google blog which describes a situation where three Google employees were found criminally responsible for failing to comply with the Italian privacy code in relation to a video uploaded by a YouTube user in Italy. A fourth Google employee was acquitted. From the Google blog post:

To be clear, none of the four Googlers charged had anything to do with this video. They did not appear in it, film it, upload it or review it. None of them know the people involved or were even aware of the video’s existence until after it was removed.

… In essence this ruling means that employees of hosting platforms like Google Video are criminally responsible for content that users upload. We will appeal this astonishing decision because the Google employees on trial had nothing to do with the video in question. Throughout this long process, they have displayed admirable grace and fortitude. It is outrageous that they have been subjected to a trial at all.

This is paramount to holding employees of an automobile manufacturer such as Ford or GM criminally liable for a drunk driver’s actions (or for that matter, someone at, say, a Budweiser or Coors plant). It’s crazy. It’s dumb. In fact “galactically stupid” and “box of rocks dumb” don’t really do it justice at all.

I’m not even sure the wording used to describe the intelligence of a computer in a book I read as a kid would do it. That book described a computer as having the intelligence of a very stupid worm. To compare this judge’s intelligence to the stupidest of the worms would be an insult to the worms.

I feel compelled to drag out the quote from the FSF’s “Some Confusing or Loaded Words and Phrases That Are Worth Avoiding” yet again:

The idea that laws decide what is right or wrong is mistaken in general. Laws are, at their best, an attempt to achieve justice; to say that laws define justice or ethical conduct is turning things upside down.

Never has this been clearer than this instance. If the judge is applying the law correctly, then the law is more broken than the result of dropping a grand piano from an airliner. If not, then this should be reversed on appeal and the judge stripped of his authority.

If allowed to stand, this is a horrifying threat to the Internet as we know it, and it may not remain confined to Italy and Italian law. I concur with this quote later in the post:

[W]e are deeply troubled by this conviction for another equally important reason. It attacks the very principles of freedom on which the Internet is built. Common sense dictates that only the person who films and uploads a video to a hosting platform could take the steps necessary to protect the privacy and obtain the consent of the people they are filming.

Indeed, common sense isn’t so common anymore. Remember this if you’re travelling to Italy.