Hope you don't mind us having this conversation over here d.f.

Anyway, looks like things are happening faster than even I thought. Slashdot has a link to this letter from Jack Valenti in the Washington Post. In it he calls for the end of what I have called "general purpose computers."

The Register has this rebuttal that pretty well sums up my feelings.

Note that I don't think Valenti will get what he wants necessarily, but it is vital that people understand what he is asking for. Digital Rights Management built into every computing device at the hardware level, plus "other ingredients... too complex to explain in a few sentences" (read: some crazy shit you would hate if you knew what I was talking about, but I'm not stupid enough to come right out and say it.) The "other ingredients" are of course the complete lockdown of the OS from the hardware level so that computer device owners are no longer in control of their own machines (so they can't bypass the digital rights management part.) And while it's often argued that this isn't really important, because most people are too stupid to control their own machines anyway (the "nobody can even program a VCR" argument) this is a red herring. The reason everybody should want general purpose computers is so the pool of developers who can screw with the machines on that level is as large as possible. Competition is good. Locked down markets (through legislatively locked down hardware) are bad for consumers. It's my contention that if the industry would build an open platform, everybody will make more money. Even them! Build a locked down platform and they'll have another Divx on their hands.
- jim 2-27-2002 4:39 pm





add a comment to this page:

Your post will be captioned "posted by anonymous,"
or you may enter a guest username below:


Line breaks work. HTML tags will be stripped.