That’s not his “real address” unless he lives in his MIT office (this is TBL, not rms).
The funny thing about physical addresses is that they are where mail goes. You know, like letters, which do still count for more than emails, and which are more likely to be civil.
I do sort of agree with the spirit of what you’re saying, but ditch the hyperbole. No one is going to bomb TBL over this. (note: that actually occurred right outside his office.)
Being put in charge of the project to standardize the evil doesn’t mean he’s necessarily in favor of the evil. Maybe this brilliant guy, the one who brought us the web we know and love, will do his best to minimize the damage that net-based DRM can/will do. If the standard dictates, for example, that the DRM not prevent you from doing a quick ‘view source’, then any browser adhering to the standard will not prevent you from viewing the source of a page.
Of course, I may be too trusting. Never meet your heroes, as they say.
Oh fuck off.
Is this your own personal torrent of outrage?
Pseudo-organised torrents of outrage
Did you make up that jumbled mess of words all by yourself or did you work on that with a pseudo-organized team of idiots?
Especially with the creepy ‘oh here’s this person’s real address’ tactics.
Ah, we get to the heart of your issue… You’re dense. It’s obviouslly a mailing address at MIT, not his home address or do you think he lives at MIT? Is there something wrong with sending letters? I guess we should also stop doing that with our congresscritters in the USA. We wouldn’t want to freak out dense people like you in the process, would we?
However big you write ‘be polite’, these calls are just an open invitation for the more trolley-y and idiotic elements to make the story be about them than the core issue.
Um, no. It’s a call to action to politely contact these people and tell them we don’t agree with them. It’s a time-honored approach you may not be aware of. I think in the USA, this bizarre practice kind of started gaining traction as the American Revolution ramped up. Strange, huh? Writing letters. What will they think of next?
So then… you think I’m using reverse psychology on a bunch of dim-witted boingboing users who are easily fooled into misunderstanding my true intentions. I guess I should change it to say that people should be impolite and then they’ll be polite? Is that how it works?
Sheer genius, my friend… you, who demands politeness whilst telling people to “fuck off”. See, I get it now. You didn’t really mean “fuck off” when you told me to “fuck off”, you were using reverse psychology and you were really just saying “kudos”. Thank you and “fuck off” to you as well, kind sir!
If you want to fight this, support people like the EFF
So now you’re going from dense to pretentious, how quaint of you. I’ve been a supporter of the EFF for about 15 years or so. I think I’ve also mentioned (scores of times on boingboing and elsewhere) that it’s a good idea to support them. You new around here “fuck off” guy?
EFF's NSA lawsuit goes ahead, thanks to Snowden leaks - #3 by Cowicide?
http://boingboing.net/2013/06/18/how-the-nsa-leaks-may-help-eff.html#comment-1751186?
Later, Fang. Don’t snag your sharp, little cuspid on your own ego on the way out the door.
Had to run and couldn’t read all the comments, so forgive me if this is repetitious. I think it’s pretty obvious that web users, if they cannot view your content, will go amuse themselves with someone else’s - therefore, DRM is a guaranteed loss of ad revenue.
Here, read the standard: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/encrypted-media/encrypted-media.html
It’s just an API that allows an encrypted codec to obtain keys through the browser, in a way that doesn’t require the browser to decrypt any data. I find it ironic that end-to-end encryption is only considered good when "you’ (as the user) are the one using it.
On that note, EME is just as useful for enabling secure audio/video chat in the browser as it is for enforcing DRM.
Being put in charge of the project to standardize the evil doesn’t mean he’s necessarily in favor of the evil.
Anyone with dignity will refuse or step down once told to enact evil. For an example of such dignity and grace under pressure, I suggest looking at Lavabit.
If you get a chance, send some money towards his fundraising campaign mentioned below:
For all the bluster I’ve seen in this thread and elsewhere, I’m surprised, disappointed and a bit embarrassed for this community that there hasn’t been a larger response to this fundraiser. It’s still only about halfway to its goal and that’s pretty fucking shitty.
Why ironic? Tools can be used for both good and evil, the tool itself is neither.
Yeah, there aren’t any good web apps out there now. We need DRM so maybe one day Google will develop gmail and google maps.
Well, okay. But does there need to be a photo? Does there need to be a longitude and lattitude? Does this all need to be below ‘public enemy number one’? All of this looks a lot like a call for a Two-Minute-Hate, than real engagement.
And regarding impoliteness, there’s a great difference between impoliteness on the internet, where you can read or not read a comment as you wish, and impoliteness addressed at someone’s physical location. Even with an office address. How many examples have we heard of powder in envelopes? Or the potential for letter bombs? Even if you tell people to be polite, I’m not optimistic enough to rely on the ability of people on the internet to keep things in proportion. This sort of stuff is just not kosher.
The internet lets you swear at people all you want and its relatively safe because I can’t come get you. Well, except that my post got deleted, so woo. My point is that raising people’s physical locations, and yeah, posting TBL’s office address and longitude and lattitude escalates stuff to physical reality, is a big escalation in terms of risk and personal threat. However well intentioned, however you tell people to be polite to offset it.
If someone posted my office address on the internet and I got an envelope from a stranger because of it, I would not open such an envelope, ever. You might call it a tried and tested method since the American revolution, but stuff like the anthrax mail thing have happened in the intervening time.
How many people would have the dedication to mail a letter bomb, but not to google the guy to find his publicly available work address? Zero.
You’re pretending that cowicide breached some magical norm. He hasn’t; you’re deluded. Or trolling. Whatever.
Hey the previous decade called and asked for their browser-compatibility-discussion talking point back.
I told them to fuck off and also to sell their shares before Aug 2008.
Seriously though, corporate policies are not relevant here. This is about attempts to interfere with your private use of the internet, and to the extent that you are free to choose an open-source browser for your own personal use, the attempt is stupid and doomed.
There’s loads more interesting stuff on youtube than on NetFlix anyway.
Or the potential for letter bombs?
So now you’re taking concern driving trollies to the letter bomb level? Please stop. If giving out mailing addresses promotes letter bombers then I guess it’s an act of terror to give out addresses to representatives you don’t agree with and ask that others contact them?
But does there need to be a photo? … Does this all need to be below ‘public enemy number one’?
Yes, to shame him.
Does there need to be a longitude and lattitude?
Yes, as a joke. It was on his own “about” page (I linked to) where he put it on there as a joke. If you don’t think it’s funny, then contact him and tell him you don’t think it was funny. I’d tell you how to contact him again, but I don’t want you to go nuts and letter bomb him over it.
Even if you tell people to be polite, I’m not optimistic enough to rely on the ability of people on the internet to keep things in proportion.
Then that’s your problem. I expect people at boingboing to be intelligent. I put the “be polite” as a reminder to keep the vitriol down and focus on substance, not to keep them from letter bombing anyone, for fuck’s sake. I think it’s better to approach people relatively politely even if you need to be firm with them. You’d do well to follow that advice as well.
The internet lets you swear at people all you want and its relatively safe because I can’t come get you.
DUDE. I’m not giving out a mailing address for people to “get” anyone. Stop concern driving trollies me.
If someone posted my office address on the internet and I got an envelope from a stranger because of it, I would not open such an envelope, ever.
Sounds like a personal problem. There’s good treatment for paranoia nowadays, I suggest you stop pestering me and look into it. If he was as paranoid as you are, I sincerely doubt he’d put his business mailing address on his “about page” along with the lat and long.
stuff like the anthrax mail thing have happened
Stuff like beaver attacks have happened. Don’t go into the woods. Ever.
… and for years after that, that forked browser will steadily decline is absolute use and relevance, so … yeah.
Who is the appropriate person at the W3C to contact about this?
FTA:
the decision to go forward with the project of standardizing DRM for the Web came from Tim Berners-Lee himself
Tim Berners-Lee’s contact page:
http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/
More:
Yes. We’re all stupid. 
Life sucks.
Sounds like a plan.
So I’ve tried to go straight to the source to find out what is really going on over at the W3C and what Sir Tim Berners-Lee really said. Corey and the EFF’s posts are both passionately in the anti-DRM camp, and that’s totally fine (and we need that side of the argument) – but it isn’t necessarily neutral reporting.
So, I clicked through links to posts and mailing list emails… and I found this:
Perspectives On Encrypted Media Extension Reaching First Public Working Draft - Jeff Jaffe, W3C CEO
I’m not completely familiar with the format of blog posts on the W3C site. I don’t know whether this is an opinion piece or official communication. Perhaps somebody else has written a blog post on W3C.org that is equally anti-DRM that I have not found yet. However, this is a piece written by the CEO, so that seems pretty official?
This blog post is a pro-DRM opinion piece. Which makes it very concerning if it is an official W3C position.
In the article, the author does a bunch of hand waving up front about how the web standards development is a “consensus process” and that they “welcome and value input from all parties.” The author says that the DRM standards are only a draft and that they will “seek comment [and] respond to issues.”
However, then the author goes on for several paragraphs making the pro-DRM case. This doesn’t seem like the committee is open and objective. It seems very much like the committee has taken a side, and is just making empty conciliatory gestures to the anti-DRM side.
Consider this excerpt from the blog post:
"Without content protection, owners of premium video content – driven by both their economic goals and their responsibilities to others – will simply deprive the Open Web of key content."
The author cannot know this outcome. And moreover, premium video content is already available widely on the web directly from content creators and distributors.
Consider also this excerpt:
"...while the actual DRM schemes are clearly not open, the Open Web must accommodate them as best possible..."
Why must the Open Web accommodate them? If it must do something, where does this leave any room for input, comments, or consensus. What if the consensus is that no DRM is best for the Open Web?
How does the W3C define consensus? Whose voices must reach consensus? Must a media company always get concessions, even if 9 out of 10 voices disagree? How is that consensus?
Do I think this W3C move is an NSA plot to censor our Internet? Not really. Not directly. Do I think it’s definitely in the same vein as things like CISPA and SOPA that hide under copyright but are embraced by corporatists whose true endgame is to censor the Internet? Hell yes, I do.
Time for the American public to help implement meshnets for their own good. And, for the good of the rest of the world for that matter.
Various meshnet info:
https://wiki.projectmeshnet.org/FAQ
The irony will be that if things keep going to they way they’ve been going… mere discussions and the building of meshnet routers will become illegal. With that communication blocked, we’ll need a meshnet to build a meshnet. In other words, it’s probably a very smart idea to build meshnets NOW (while we still can).
If you doubt that things can get this bad, then talk with Lavabit (oh wait, you can’t in detail) or anyone else who’s received a NSL. Consider how trashed our rights are under our bullet-ridden, despised U.S. Constitution already. It’s only a matter of time until they come after more of our civil rights and our Internet - I’ve brought it up and discussed the urgency of a meshnet many times before…
Here too: http://boingboing.net/2010/12/08/techcrunch-paypal-bl.html#comment-961592?
Hopefully now that the NSA spying is really hitting the fan, people will get more serious about it now. You also have to wonder, what happens if the W3C is demanded to change things (along with entities such as Microsoft, Apple and Google that create our browsers) by the NSA, etc. and they can’t mention a peep about it because they are all given a NSL?
That’s possible. That’s the America we live in. That’s reality. That’s one of many reasons we need meshnets mobilized now, while we still can.
It’s time to put our dissatisfaction and rage to good use instead of whining and being victims. It’s about time United States citizens performed a (peaceful) pre-emptive strike against those who would strip us of our rights instead of always being in damage-control.
A widespread meshnet isn’t just a historic, patriotic national act of defiance… it’s a practical, pre-emptive tool to protect us from megalomaniacal corporatists that are turning the screws tighter and tighter on our basic human rights.
MESHNET… Naw.
Do you think the military-industrial complex is going to sit idly by while an ever-increasingly connected populace educates one another via the internet and helps to thwart extremely profitable wars and bombings such as in places like Syria? The more the Internet works for average Americans (and cuts into their profits), the more corporatists are going to want to clamp down on it in gradual, insidious ways.
This is my final warning. Corporatists are coming for your Internet freedom. It’s become too powerful and with their hubris they underestimated its impact (until now). Call me a nutjob. Mock me. Crucify me. But, just do me one favor before you tear me apart. WATCH what they do in the near future to take away your Internet. At least pay attention. Be vigilant and if you even see a hint that I’m right, please don’t be a coward frozen in fear and hopelessness and take peaceful action instead.
Goodbye.
The ‘Open standard’ part of it is just some trivial boilerplate covering the process for handing off an encrypted payload to a proprietary module (left wholly undefined and unstandardized, ‘out of scope’ y’know…) for decryption and rendering.
It’s a sneaky bit of wordplay; but the end result is, effectively, declaring that ‘if you can use the browser’s HTTP implementation to download it and some javascript to pass it off to another program entirely, it’s now a Real Web Standard!’
Luckily, it will save us from the bad old days of ‘plugins’ because they aren’t called plugins anymore, they are called ‘content decryption modules’.
