Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

UPDATED: Prescott an anti-piracy chip?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
September 11, 2002 1:25:03 AM

Bracing itself for another potential fight with computer privacy advocates, Intel Corp. said yesterday that its next generation of microchips, due next year, would include anti-piracy features that will protect computers against hackers and viruses while giving digital publishers powerful new tools to control the use of their products.

The technology, code-named LaGrande, was designed to protect computers from viruses and bad-natured hackers. But the feature will also give Hollywood, the recording industry, and software makers much stronger controls over the way consumers use their digital music, films, and computer programs.

Publishers, for example, may prevent PCs that run LaGrande and Microsoft Corp.'s software-based Palladium security technology from copying CDs, forwarding certain documents, or running unlicensed software.

Paul Otellini, Intel's president, said the chip maker would include no copyright protections in LaGrande, but he acknowledged that digital publishers could use the technology with software programs such as Palladium to create their own.

Intel intends to include the technology in the Prescott chip design, which will succeed the Pentium 4 as the Santa Clara, Calif., company's flagship PC chip in the second half of 2003.

Until then, consumer advocacy groups say they will lobby to ensure that publishers don't use these so-called secure computing initiatives to spy on PC users.

"These systems are likely to police copyright by watching who consumes what," said Chris Hoofnagle, legislative counsel with the Washington-based Electronic Privacy Information Center. "There are grave consequences for privacy with these systems," he added.

Intel's LaGrande effort is part of the Trusted Computing Platform Alliance, a coalition of high-tech giants including Intel, IBM Corp., Microsoft, and Hewlett-Packard Co.

While Intel is approaching secure computing at the level of the silicon chips and their accompanying components, Microsoft's Palladium initiative is software-based. Microsoft plans to include Palladium in future versions of the Windows operating system.

Privacy groups locked horns with Intel in 1999 over another attempt to solve the same security problems that LaGrande is tackling. Intel assigned a digital identifier, known as a processor serial number, to every new Pentium III chip, but disabled the feature a year later, after privacy groups said the serial number threatened to make anonymous Web surfing and Internet transactions impossible.

Ari Schwartz, associate director of the Washington-based Center for Democracy and Technology, said LaGrande appeared to give users more control over the information revealed about themselves than the processor serial numbers. His group is meeting regularly with Microsoft and others to monitor their intentions.

"A lot of what's decided is going to be on the policy side, not the technical side," he said.

Seth Schoen, staff technologist for the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation, said Palladium and LaGrande could create a computing environment that is safer for publishers and their content, but less safe for computer users looking to maintain their privacy.

By protecting vaults of data and the pathways that transfer them within the PC, LaGrande will prevent viruses from infecting central parts of the computer, make it harder for hackers to take over computers remotely, and allow for more secure e-commerce transactions, Otellini said in a speech at Intel's twice-yearly developer forum yesterday.

But, he added, the chip maker learned from the processor serial number debacle. In "creating a safer computing environment," he said, Intel is working with privacy groups "to ensure that we do it in ways that are acceptable to the norms of privacy today."

Intel used its developer forum to announce other new technologies and show off designs of the future. Demonstrations included an experimental Pentium 4 chip that designers ratcheted up to 4.7 gigahertz, nearly twice as speedy as the fastest chip on the market, a 2.8 gigahertz chip. They also showed a sneak preview of a chip code-named Madison, which is the next iteration of Intel's Itanium line of server chips.

Finally, Intel said it would move a new technology, currently being used in server chips, into top-of-the-line desktop computers this year. The 3.0 gigahertz Pentium 4, due this quarter, will include a feature known as hyper-threading, which improves performance as much as 30 percent with some software applications by making one processor act like two.


From <A HREF="http://www.iexbeta.com" target="_new">http://www.iexbeta.com&lt;/A>

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by nja469 on 09/12/02 07:10 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
September 11, 2002 1:39:06 AM

I hope Intel decides to go ahead with this... would put the hurt on Intel big time as they cut out about half their market...... good thinking Intel... toss a few more million users to AMD why don't ya? =P
September 11, 2002 1:59:08 AM

Not entirely however.

The later chips will use LaGrande or Palladium fully. We can redo a debate again here about Palladium, but point being, major HW companies are using it in the future chips, it ain't gonna be easy to flock to other companies if we wanted to.
We'll just have to wait and see how far this anti-piracy goes. I have hinted before I may be behind it, if it were to truly block many things that invade my comp or harm it.

--
When buying an AthlonXP, please make sure the bus is at 133MHZ, or you will get a lower speed!
Related resources
September 11, 2002 2:11:46 AM

Seriously, just when I was actually getting excited about intel again.. LOL

Actually thinking about it, it's possible AMD would eventually do the same thing if microsoft threatens them enough. Since it requires software (the controversial and civil rights trampling MS palladium) to activate the hardware lock down part. Either way though it wouldn't be as immediate as prescott for AMD, if even implemented by them.

We already know when palladium draws near, it will cause some anxious controversy, hell I might even switch to open source at that point. While I'm not a big pirate, sure a few things, but not as bad as some, I do not believe in buying things to only limit what I can do with it. It's supposed to be illegal, but in America anymore, less rights is "anti-terriost" and good for the country. AMD could play it cool and call Intel big-brother and win over alot of scared users, even big business. Just another example of how we allow our government to take away more and more of our rights, which according to the constitutuion we're supposed to have control over.

I just keep thinking about the harmless intel P3 serial number issue. It caused hysteria until intel let it be known it could be turned off. When I bought a presario when the P3 was still new, one of the "Features" was the serial number being disabled automatically.
September 11, 2002 2:16:16 AM

They'll brainwash you that it will prevent hackers and protect your privacy, while it is the smokescreen for all the limitations and rights as a human they're taking away from you.

If they tried, I mean really tried, they could secure your computer now without taking away rights, but that wouldn't be very american would it? lol.
September 11, 2002 2:42:12 AM

Because people didn't want to be identified or think they could be "tracked" by the government. The program had merits, but it was possible it could have been abused (sell info about what sites you went to, what you did with your PC, etc). Even though intel might not have ever done that, they could have, a serial number identifying your PC.. a hidden packet sent to them on the net, that idea is what pissed ppl off. I think even 20/20 or dateline, one of those shows did something on it. Most people thought of the potentional for abuse and intel got a lot of flack for it.

Honestly the serial number seems harmless compared to the next gen anti-piracy stuff. Just wait until all the software/hardware terminology of palladium or LaGrande is dumbed down and explained to the public, more fuss to come for sure :o )

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by nja469 on 09/10/02 10:49 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
September 11, 2002 2:47:13 AM

Lol, this time by MS truthfully, it will be the king of marketting!
Just wait a see how everyone who are Joes will be drawn to it so fast like a P4 with SDRAM sells on Boxing day! :lol: 

--
Where did your THGC username come from and why did you choose it? <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/community/modules.php?na..." target="_new">Tell here!</A>
September 11, 2002 12:56:01 PM

Ahoy there Mateyys!!! Those fish-gutted landlubbers on the USS LaGrande will never catch the crew of the Jolly Kazaa....Argh!!!!

Just because you're not paranoid, doesn't mean they're not watching you.
September 11, 2002 1:47:38 PM

lol.. really. I thought in my head last night that LaGrandè sounded like a new combo from Taco Bell.
September 11, 2002 3:02:19 PM

then BOYCOTT! you do not NEED a computer!!! Human civilization has survived for 7 million+ years with out it!!!!

Just boycott the mother f'ers!

Let companies know that they cannot control us!!!! if you let them that is one step closer to fascism!

get it!?

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?id=9933" target="_new"> My Rig </A>
September 11, 2002 3:37:25 PM

Well, since it is software based, just go with a non-MS OS. Then you'll have hardware security, and no software to access that hardware, making DRM impossible.

-SammyBoy
September 11, 2002 3:51:03 PM

that will work but only for a short time. As softwae will require the architecture, so will the Linux flavored operating systems.

It's a matter of telling the big fascist government and businesses no. you say that by not buying that product, which invades your privacy and your free will to use your computer.

you let this happen, then the government will control your computer in the name of terrorism and charge 40 bucks a month per computer in the terrorism releif fund; For example.

Amazing isn't it how broad a term it is and how easy it can be applied to anything?

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?id=9933" target="_new"> My Rig </A>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
September 11, 2002 4:10:50 PM

I may be stupid, but I fail to see how anything in silicon would help protect me from hackers or virus or anything. Neither do I understand how some CPU feature would stop me from burning CD's, copying illegal software and such.

All I can image (and even that is far fetched) is the cpu would refuse to run "unsigned" software or not play unsigned MP3s or something. And even then, how long will it take for some shareware MP3 player to come out that works around that ? How is a CPU going to understand what its executing (say I run Linux or whatever other OS).

Well, actually, maybe the idea is (only) Palladium making use of this "only run signed apps" thing, but that would not require any hardware support, would it ? And who on earth would want an OS that will *not* run >90% of legacy software, shareware, heck, even self written unsigned software??? Someone enlighten me please

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
September 11, 2002 6:02:33 PM

according to <A HREF="http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html" target="_new">this</A> yes it will be at the hardware level. there will be a chip inside the cpu that when a file, program, etc. is executed the chip will request an authentication number from a server (whether it's the computer manufacturer, software maker, etc). then and only then can the task be executed. ok yeah, everyone might not have to be worried about this, cause not everyone is running illegal software. but where does it end? the government/MS doesn't like a certain document you're viewing, they can block it. they don't like a document you're creating in MS word or whatever, they can block that too. which also means every computer will need internet access if it's to get permission to run something from a server. so another that will come out on top of this is service providers.

MS/government are going to have just about any and all hardware and software makers out there behind this, cause thee all-mighty dollar. people are too ignorant and naive to think and question things themselves. MS will sugar-coat this so much that every consumer that doesn't know any better will be running out to purchase this new setup and wonder why it took so long to get these "great security features!" consumers will not realize the consequences of this until sometime long after it's all implimented and MS flexes it's muscle and someone FINALLY feels their rights are violated. by then it'll be too late to turn back.

you have to remember, ethics, morals, honor and making an honest dollar are things of the past. it's all about marketing/brain-washing now, no honest advertising. no selling a product solely because it is indeed actually better than competitor's products.

what's ironic about all of this, is people are crying about privacy, civil/human rights about something that's a privlege to have. i totally agree with sk8er that noone really NEEDS a computer. but when laziness and gluttony are the main themes of todays life, i don't see that happening (a boycott).

and you think this is still a ways off? ha! i recall seeing a dell commercial a little over a month ago about their laptops with winXP installed. about all the new "security features" that'll "stop hackers and viruses". and having all these actors on the commercial going "wow! i can't believe how safe and secure i feel accessing the web". "this is truly great".

there is no hope.
September 11, 2002 6:49:48 PM

Quote:
i guess i'm not buying a prescott.

then please don't. but it is the future. intel isn't doing this to solely get profits, they're doing it because it is what the consumer wants. i want security. you don't. if you think e-commerce has any relevance in the future, you would think it's a great idea too. if all the ppl on this forum didn't buy intel cpus, how much would it affect their revenue? (like 0.0000001%).....

and for the paranoid: ...magic lattern

the government already ownz ya.

<font color=green> there's more to life than increasing its speed -Ghandi</font color=green>
September 11, 2002 7:52:36 PM

Ok for all of us that are running a plethora of illegal software on our computers, just a thought for ya. If someone can hack or crack a program say for example warcraft 3 enough to where you could create new serial and log onto their server to play multiplayer. Why not just have a program that interupts the server connection and generates a valid authentication. Even if it doesn't specifically work that way anytime you have software involved someone is going to crack it. Not only that but Microsoft released the perfect hacked version of XP, "corporate edition." They took a step forward and then just undid everything they were trying to accomplish. I seriously doubt for anyone who knows jack about computers that any of these piracy measures will ever amount to jack.
September 11, 2002 8:28:51 PM

Quote:
I seriously doubt for anyone who knows jack about computers that any of these piracy measures will ever amount to jack.

Exactly. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. For every 'security' there is a crack. And I can bet in this case, it'll be through Linux with a kernel mod that only 'pretends' to be secure.

Besides, honestly, I'm all for it. I don't need any wiz program to do my ripping for me. So long as stereos designed to play CDs have a headphone jack (or better, an optical jack) I can make all of the MP3s or copies of CDs (or mixes) that I want to still <i>legally</i> enjoy my music. And so long as video editing cards allow me to run in an s-video jack from an external device, I can enjoy making all of the <i>legal</i> DivX I want. After all, in <i>any</i> 'copyright protection' scheme, so long as I'm the author of the file (and thus the copyright holder) I can do whatever I want. ;) 

And as for anyone 'pirating' anything, hell, they get what they deserve if this all actually happens. Heh heh heh. :-p

<pre><A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/comic/186.htm" target="_new"><font color=red>It's all relative...</font color=red></A></pre><p>
September 11, 2002 8:34:54 PM

This is hardware-based. Can you manually write software that can actually disable a piece of silicon?
Can you disable an FPU, or a stage in the CPU?

--
Where did your THGC username come from and why did you choose it? <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/community/modules.php?na..." target="_new">Tell here!</A>
September 11, 2002 8:38:06 PM

Well it seems this forum's top debater had suddenly an opinion on the other side, when 90% are against, heh, I didn't expect that!


--
Where did your THGC username come from and why did you choose it? <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/community/modules.php?na..." target="_new">Tell here!</A>
September 11, 2002 8:43:06 PM

This is what I am thinking in a way.

Also, they did not say Prescott will be fully Palladium stuff, only partly. Geez it's not like buying a Prescott will suddenly make your illegal Windows blow your comp to pieces and you will receive a mail two days later saying: TOLD YOU SO SUCKA! -Your friendly Billy-boy.

I am not saying I am all for it, I am saying if we'd get more info, real-time examples of how it works, perhaps we can judge. Most of us who are against it are judging based on paper sheets and blueprints, while it has not been demoed.
If it truly amounts to stopping hackers and viruses and spammers, then great. Keyword here is IF, before somebody replies to me again countering that.
For the record, I read that you may disable Palladium anytime to run something, it's just future versions of the program, which support Palladium, will not run without it being on. This also means you can run your own stuff in a place called the "Vault", your private place. This can be taken from MS' website. Of course I know about how a home website often adds cherries to everything, but the same could be said about Intel's. While in reality it is not true, while Intel's website on the main page may make any Joe fall for the P4 anytime, there is a part which is technical and any techie would enjoy checking. MS' website has this too, so check the tech stuff there to know more.
Also I doubt you will have to validate by connecting each time. That would mean opening Word, would take 10 seconds, something which is a step backwards, and would not be one bit fun. Imagine loading games then.

--
Where did your THGC username come from and why did you choose it? <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/community/modules.php?na..." target="_new">Tell here!</A><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Eden on 09/11/02 04:46 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
September 11, 2002 8:46:07 PM

Quote:
This is hardware-based. Can you manually write software that can actually disable a piece of silicon?
Can you disable an FPU, or a stage in the CPU?

Write software in Assembly and you can easily avoid accessing whatever you don't want to access. ;) 

<pre><A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/comic/186.htm" target="_new"><font color=red>It's all relative...</font color=red></A></pre><p>
September 11, 2002 8:48:03 PM

So what you are saying is, even if hardware-based stuff which is said to be the highest level of security, can be simply disabled by a simple programmer?

--
Where did your THGC username come from and why did you choose it? <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/community/modules.php?na..." target="_new">Tell here!</A>
September 11, 2002 8:48:30 PM

This is actually going to be an extensions you know. I.E. if software does not use these new commands to the CPU and other devices, software doesn't need to. I'm guessing M$ will begin writing software (as part of its new Palladium environment) that'll use this kinda stuff in the PC, so I guess I'm either sticking with XP for a while or switching to another OS. However, if 3rd party software designers choose not to use this, they don't have to. The chip will function normally, only you will apparantly not be as "safe" whatever the hell that means.

"We are Microsoft, resistance is futile." - Bill Gates, 2015.
September 11, 2002 8:50:08 PM

To be honest, I'm not really on either side, per se. I don't agree with limiting anyone's rights. I also don't agree with people who steal, or get away with any crime for that matter.

In an ideal world, we should all have the right to do anything that we want, but we should also have the desire to work together for each other's benefit and not do anything to cause one another harm.

Since this obviously isn't an ideal world, somewhere there has to be give. Sometimes it's in allowing crime to happen that harms people because 'the system' isn't designed to stop it or prosecute afterwords. Sometimes it's in putting restrictions on what is allowable because too many people are taking advantage of 'the system'.

It's a give and take thing where really, in the end, no solution is 'right', but at least the solution is hopefully less 'wrong' than no solution at all.

<pre><A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/comic/186.htm" target="_new"><font color=red>It's all relative...</font color=red></A></pre><p>
September 11, 2002 9:24:09 PM

This is not just an Intel Feature. AMD will also be adding similar Technology in their Hammer Platform. I guess, you wouldn't buy AMD also????

KG

"Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity." - Sarah Chambers
September 11, 2002 10:15:38 PM

you're right.

amd will definitely have this too.

<font color=green> there's more to life than increasing its speed -Ghandi</font color=green>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
September 11, 2002 10:23:19 PM

>This is not just an Intel Feature. AMD will also be
>adding similar Technology in their Hammer Platform.

I doubt it. Not any time soon anyway.

>I guess, you wouldn't buy AMD also????

Well, I would not even consider buying an OS that would not allow me to run the software I choose, so all these Lagrande or whatever its called transistors would be wasted silicon for me, since I'd rather switch to Linux or whatever other OS that doesnt bigb(r)other me.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
September 11, 2002 11:08:59 PM

This wont happen often

I do agreed with Eden wait and see 1.if ms/intel start that giving project all computer industry will enter the wagon

At the end i have speak with a horny lady
September 11, 2002 11:11:54 PM

Paranoid much?

-Jeremy

<font color=blue>Just some advice from your friendly neighborhood blue man </font color=blue> :smile:
September 12, 2002 12:10:41 AM

somehow "trusted windows" sounds like an oxymoron to me.

<font color=green> there's more to life than increasing its speed -Ghandi</font color=green>
September 12, 2002 2:00:31 AM

Yeah, I mean it probably will be widely used by major companies, they want it, however it's up to the result which we want to base our judgements on, not preliminary sheets!

--
Where did your THGC username come from and why did you choose it? <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/community/modules.php?na..." target="_new">Tell here!</A>
September 12, 2002 2:36:19 AM

I dont support this.. Why? I dont have money to buy $12 CD's for 1 or 2 good songs. I dont have the $100 to buy a new Windows that will be outdated in a year, same with the office suite. I dont have the hundreds to buy Adobe Photoshop to edit a few pictures. I dont much expendable income, and therefore I couldnt afford these things. As a computer a have a $315 Athlon 1800. To you that can afford to buy your software, all the power to you, you have nothing to worry about. I wont be running an Intel anyway, because I cant afford it. But ill go right out and admit it, I dont buy software. Since I wouldnt buy any of these anyway, the companies arent really losing money. I would probably be running Linux right now. You can criticize me all you want, but frankly many people are just like me.
September 12, 2002 2:52:55 AM

Dude I understand you. I said so many times, only if the purposes turn off positive, I would support it, but if its goal is really (AGAIN NO ONE IS 100% RIGHT on this case) to make us pay all the time, yes I would protest as well because I also am not rich, I am 16 years old with a mere 790$ CDN in the bank, that keeps me living with my parents who also have not much money to rave about! But I live on the edge by spending every last penny to keep life fun!

--
Where did your THGC username come from and why did you choose it? <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/community/modules.php?na..." target="_new">Tell here!</A>
September 12, 2002 3:00:58 AM

Im a 10th grader in highschool, so you can see where your coming from. I basically had to scavenge all the money I could just to pay for my computer, there would be no way I could run if I paid for the software. I know people spend their hours writing the code I get for free, but I just dont have the money to pay for it.
September 12, 2002 4:12:43 AM

Well, your current software will still run. You just won't get the latest and greatest (once software manufacturers begin to standardize this). I can understand the mp3 thing and I think it's the fault of the music industry (their greek) that you can't buy individual songs. However, there is no moral high ground as far as pirating software. People do it, and that's perfectly fine, but you can't expect these companies to try not to stop you or blame them for doing it. If people were finding ways to circumvent your sales methods, wouldn't you do something about it?

"We are Microsoft, resistance is futile." - Bill Gates, 2015.
September 12, 2002 4:43:03 AM

You got a point there God, we really cant blame them for trying. Hardware solutions are a little harder to crack than others. But oh well, they said the same thing about DVDs. But yet I have a nice collection of DVD quality ripps from Kazaa.
I will continue to buy the software that I find usefull and games that I love. I have the money. But I also wanna try it out for a while. Hence why I use P2P as well.
I will not however pay 300+ dollars for anything (premeire, Photoshop).


Benchmarks are like sex, everybody loves doing it, everybody thinks they are good at it.
September 12, 2002 4:43:51 AM

i agree and i'll say this about pirating. i have no ill feelings against it. if you can find the ways to get it, then more power to you. i admit, back when i had built my first computers i didn't own a lick of software i ran (and i had everything running from winNT to maya). if learning, messing around or showing off to your friends is your intentions so be it. BUT, the moment you ask a penny for what you've done you have to own the software, too much at stake to take a chance when you're trying to make a living. for the past 3 years now i've paid for a whole suite of adobe gear. sometimes incidents happen to make you realize it's not worth it.

if the intentions of this were to solely try and cut down on piracy i'd have no problem with it. but, i think it'll go way beyond that and someone is going to end up paying bigtime. whether it's in the form of money or freedoms is another question.
September 12, 2002 1:55:55 PM

Quote:
I dont support this.. Why? I dont have money to buy $12 CD's for 1 or 2 good songs. I dont have the $100 to buy a new Windows that will be outdated in a year, same with the office suite. I dont have the hundreds to buy Adobe Photoshop to edit a few pictures. I dont much expendable income, and therefore I couldnt afford these things. As a computer a have a $315 Athlon 1800. To you that can afford to buy your software, all the power to you, you have nothing to worry about. I wont be running an Intel anyway, because I cant afford it. But ill go right out and admit it, I dont buy software. Since I wouldnt buy any of these anyway, the companies arent really losing money. I would probably be running Linux right now. You can criticize me all you want, but frankly many people are just like me.

Okay, I <i>will</i> criticize you all that I want. You want criticism, you're gonna get it!

You and people like you are <i>exactly</i> what is wrong with the world today! You think that everyone just owes you something. You have absolutely no respect for the hard work and money that other people pay because of you. All you can think about is yourselves.

Let me tell you something. I don't have the money to go out any buy a $100,000 Mercedes, but I don't go out stealing one, justifying it with the <b>incredibly lame</b> mentality that "I wouldn't have bought it anyway, so they aren't losing money."

I don't have the money to buy a new PC. So I continue using my 500MHz Celeron. I don't go out and <i>steal</i> a nice AXP 2200+ system, nor do I mug people to get the money to buy one. I <b>work</b> and <b>save</b> until I can <b>legally</b> replace my aging system. Not just because it's the law, but because in a <b>society</b> where our actions affect numerous other people, it's just the <b>right</b> thing to do.

So when I don't have the money to go out and buy a CD just to hear a song I heard on the radio, I don't go and steal it. I simply live without it and <i>save up</i> to buy it if I really want it badly.

<b>STEALTHBIG, you and people like you make me sick!</b> And it is <i>exactly</i> people like you that <b>deserve</b> for hardware and software copyright protection to become a necessity in our daily lives.

Hell, in my opinion forcing you to actually pay for your next product is <b>far</b> better treatment than what you <b>deserve</b>. In my opinion you <i>should</i> be getting the fines for thousands of dollars and jail time that are the <i>legal</i> punishments for pirating software.

It's also people like you who <i>ruin</i> perfectly good and <b>legal</b> businesses and products. For example: Napster! When one of my favorite CDs got scratched, I was upset. But one quick <b>and legal</b> download on Napster and I had an unscratched copy of the song. I ripped the other tracks, and then burned a new, undamaged, CD.

Or when I wanted to listen to some of my favorite CDs at work, instead of carting CDs back and forth, I just used Napster to transport the large amounts of data that all of those MP3s took.

And when my friend wrote his new song and wanted to freely distribute it because he didn't have enough albums to release a whole CD (and at the rate he writes songs, probably wouldn't have even had enough a year later) he used Napster to get it out there for people to enjoy.

All perfectly <b>legal</b> uses of Napster!

But now, can <i>anyone</i> use Napster to perform perfectly legal tasks ever again? No! Why? Because people <i>like you</i> ruined it for everyone. Not only that, but the folks who owned and ran Napster were put out of jobs and the owners put into debt simply because <i>you</i> couldn't have been bothered to pay for a CD when you only wanted one or two songs from it.

Well congrats! I hope you really enjoy those songs because <b>someone</b> paid for them in the end with far more than the measily twenty bucks (or less) per CD that it would have cost you. But of course <i>you</i> don't care about that, because <i>you</i> can only think about <i>yourself</i>.

<pre><A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/comic/186.htm" target="_new"><font color=red>It's all relative...</font color=red></A></pre><p>
September 12, 2002 3:14:40 PM

I definetly agree with you on most of your points.

<font color=blue>Unofficial Forum Cop</font color=blue>
September 12, 2002 3:22:41 PM

That's nice, piracy is wrong we all know this. We don't need book sized posts on it. Stopping piracy shouldn't resort to big brother tactics though, it is government backed illegal.

MP3's should be available to download for a price. That MP3 should then be coded for your legal use; that is an acceptable form of an anti-piracy measure. As for movies, honestly techie, it is rare when I can find a great quality download off the net. Better anti-ripping security on the disks could prevent this type of piracy. Same goes for software. Product activation isn't enough; the media needs to be encoded so it cannot be copied. They can do it if they REALLY tried. If they need to revise it annually then so be it. Since charging $600 for a barely updated version of office is their goal, they can update the anti-decoding measures placed on disks annually if need be.

Rather, the government and these companies want to get inside of peoples homes and businesses legally. Total security and privacy is BS. If they REALLY tried, they could have attained it by other means already other than big-broware. They can't guarantee it will be secure, nothing is a guarantee in the tech business. I do not see this tech sitting well with the public either, but I'm sure it will be sugar coated and they'll further brainwash the public into thinking it's for the good of "America" WHAT CRAP!

Yes, piracy is bad. In terms of music, yes new artists can be hurt my pirating and I feel a REAL attempt by RIAA to offer a pay for play service could work. I'm not too sulky for Microsoft and other multi-billion dollar software and movies companies.

There are other ways around it; limiting people’s rights is not the answer. Unfortunately in China it could be their answer. So I suggest ppl move there if they perfer not having rights and want to have the government tell them what you can and cannot do at home. In our society, educated people shouldn't let government PR brainwashing dilute them into believing this and only this is the answer to stop piracy. It won't even totally stop piracy, come on! Why let them walk all over you in the name of "Security"? LOL [-peep-] them! It's also likely they'll end up spying on what you do since they'll have constant connections to servers for authorizations. Think this doesn't happen? Wasn't it realnetworks or maybe winamp that was caught doing this exact thing 2 years ago?

One last note. Am I the only one assuming a loss in performance? What good is a 4GHz prescott with HT when it won't perform any of the tasks you ask of it until big brother says it can do so? That means when you open media player to play some music, then open word to type a paper and launch internet explorer for research all those programs won't do sh!t until it's all authenticated. Don't sit there and hand over all the rights and protection from government control you were entitled to when the constitution was conceived 228 years ago. We're supposed to have say in what the government does, but for some reason that is never the case since people back what the government wants since they've effectively been brainwashed into believing the further loss of rights is good for them and everyone. Yes fuking boycott like someone said!
September 12, 2002 4:40:25 PM

Quote:
That's nice, piracy is wrong we all know this. We don't need book sized posts on it. Stopping piracy shouldn't resort to big brother tactics though, it is government backed illegal.

That's nice. Stopping our supposedly-existing freedomes is wrong. We all know this. We don't need book-sized posts on it. Stopping big brother shouldn't resort to illegal tactics though. It is society-harming illegal. :-p

See how pointless this whole debate really is? So long as we don't live in a perfect world, there is no perfect answer.

Quote:
MP3's should be available to download for a price. That MP3 should then be coded for your legal use; that is an acceptable form of an anti-piracy measure.

I agree. And how many people who pirate MP3s because they disagree with RIAA have even <i>written</i> to RIAA to tell them that they would enjoy such a good solution as pay-per-song? How many people who pirate MP3s have even outright boycotted not just the RIAA, but the companies (like radio stations and movie theaters) which support the RIAA and written a letter to the RIAA and the companies that they boycott explaining what they are doing? How many people at <i>both state and federal elections</i> purposely vote for the candidates that they know will support their rights to ensure that their rights are protected?

Or is the simple truth that most people don't actually give a damn about the politics involved, but just want free stuff because they're cheap ingrates who only care about themselves?

Quote:
There are other ways around it; limiting people’s rights is not the answer. Unfortunately in China it could be their answer. So I suggest ppl move there if they perfer not having rights and want to have the government tell them what you can and cannot do at home.

You speak as though we actually have the supposed rights that we delude ourselves into believing we have. Yet there are state laws which make offensive language illegal. Hell, there are state laws that make perfectly acceptable acts illegal even in the privacy of your own home between consenting adults. Freedom went out the window <b>long</b> ago in America. If you believe for one second that America is actually a democracy or that American's actually have the freedom they think they do, then you're either delusional or ignorant.

Freedom does <b>not</b> exist in America. If you want freedom, I suggest you get together with some friends, pick up some guns, and assassinate 3/4ths of <b>all</b> government in America so that you can redesign the entire system. We have a right to bear arms for a reason after all.

If you're not willing to actually take action to change the system, then all that's left is for you to either wake up to the realization that you have no more freedom than someone in China, or to whine like a little girl.

Here is a quote from a document that hopefully Americans put at least some stock in:
Quote:
<font color=blue>We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, <b>--That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government</b>, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.</font color=blue>

(Color and bolding of phrase were my own affects and not part of the original documentation of course.)

So if you want freedom, then <b>change the system</b>. Otherwise sit down and shut up or go play somewhere else.

Quote:
One last note. Am I the only one assuming a loss in performance? What good is a 4GHz prescott with HT when it won't perform any of the tasks you ask of it until big brother says it can do so?

Are you really that clueless? WHen you start up a program you already have to wait a good time for loading from the hard drive and program initialization. So we have one more small authentication process slowing down program startup a tiny bit more. Big whoop. I doubt anyone would even notice the difference. And after authentication is validated, the CPU runs just like it always did. Certainly no performance degredation there. So tap a clue before you sprout such FUD. Use that grey fleshy thing between your ears.

<pre><A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/comic/186.htm" target="_new"><font color=red>It's all relative...</font color=red></A></pre><p>
September 12, 2002 5:18:20 PM

Well if you used your brain you wouldn't be poor white trailer trash. Of course you resolved your argument to personal attacks and insultes for no reason, and didn't even skim the actual topic of anti-piracy hardware/software. Typical trash tactics of slvr.

We all know the fact is I alone can't change anything and Americans as a whole would have to. Let's face it, most people are too lazy or dumb to care about anything besides a new ford pickup truck and a big united we stand flag in the back window. So, yes you're right, nothing is going to change. This doesn't constitute that we have to be happy about it. That was the only good point you made, about how hard it is to change things. I also applaude the fact that you can quote the constitution, but then make references that are skewed and pointless. Then, as usual you went of the subject only to attack someone. You're a bully, and contribute nothing to these forums or society. I'd love to see you just once, actually debate about the views of others and not attack them personally. It's trashy and unwelcome, and if anything you should shutup and run along and get a real job to actually contribute to society.

It's sad when someone as old as you on your admittedly old computer since you're poor trailer trash, and you have nothing to do except attack people personally. So here I am attacking you, and you'll repost telling me "I'm what is wrong with the world, and I think everything should be handed to me," etc.. and "people work for what they have, and no one should steal it from them".. like you always do. No surprise there. Yes the people downloading britney spears off the net are total crooks. Poor Bill Gates and his billions of dollars. Why do you defend them so much, being that you haven't achieved anything in life? You went to school for a variety of programming languages, yet your own web page looks like a dreamweaver template. Fact is I'm a medical student and my parents are both elected judges. Nothing was handed to them. My family immigrated here years ago from Greece and my parents worked extremely hard to attain their status they have today. I am working extremely hard in med school to become a productive, useful citizen, actually doing mankind good.

If you can actually post something relating to the facts and not attacking me personally then I'll be happy to engage in a healthy debate. What you call debating is actually degrading people for their views, and you're a sad sad person for doing so. In the meantime try the classifieds, do society a favor and get a job helping people as a whole; a street cleaner or lawn care and mow my lawn for me since I'll be busy making a real difference in the world while you're sitting in your trailer attacking people, some new to the subject of technology since you have nothing better to do with your time or life. Very sad indeed!
September 12, 2002 5:43:28 PM

Are you saying it is ok to steal software then?


There is very little difference downloading it and shoplifting it from the store. And I would say that the majority of people would not shoplift it from the store. I don't pirate anything. Hell, I work 2 jobs just to buy the occational piece of software or upgrade my PC. I didn't have a whole lot growing up and I still don't have a whole lot. I don't think I am entitled to anything free. Things should be aquired for hard work, and people should be rewarded for thier hard work. Stealing it because you weren't going to pay for it anyways so it won't hurt anybody is a terrible arguement.

(The question is for you, the rest is more general.)

<font color=blue>Unofficial Forum Cop</font color=blue>
September 12, 2002 6:41:48 PM

Bravo I agree with you 100% silver. You brought up some excellent points. I’ve been saying it forever but always got the, your a troll stfu mentality. Or bah spud they don’t deserver our money deal. Now myself I buy windows and all the games and since I run a store well I can resell things I don’t like. But my only qualm is the mp3 one that’s a very grey area and there are hours to discuss that topics legal ramifications and morals that are tied to it.

-Jeremy


<font color=blue>Just some advice from your friendly neighborhood blue man </font color=blue> :smile:
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
September 12, 2002 7:04:02 PM

>Now myself I buy windows and all the games and since I
>run a store well I can resell things I don’t like.

You agree with Silver, yet you admit committing fraud on a regular basis ? You're not allowed to "test" software, and resell it if you dont like it ! Read the licence agreements, most software will not allow you to do this ! I remember winning an official 3D Studio licence / software kit, that was worth a small fortune back then, but I couldnt (re)sell it.. that simple..

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
September 12, 2002 7:13:45 PM

Why can't you buy software and resell it if you don't want it anymore if you remove it from your PC.There are only special instances when you can't resell something and that is usually if you get something for free or for special circumstances.

<font color=blue>Unofficial Forum Cop</font color=blue>
September 12, 2002 7:23:28 PM

In general, what I've seen, is that the younger crowd is full of the people who will take what they have instead of paying for it, and justify it by saying "I can't afford it."

Where does the "I can't afford it" excuse end and the reality of "I can't have it then" being?

Now, to be fair, I have not payed for all my software. I've been given legal copies of quite a bit of it, and there is probably a program or two on my system that shouldn't be there. However, I do what I can to buy any software that I use regularly. But, I know that if I spent tens of thousands of hours writing something, I would be pissed when some teenager steals it because "I can't afford it anyway". And it's not just one person, because usually that person will pass it on to someone else, who will pass it on to someone else, ect.

Now, if everyone bought everything like they should, prices would likely be lower, so people could afford more. There's a reason computer software prices are as high as they are.

What irks me more, is the people who not only steal a piece of software, but then post asking for help when they have trouble with it. It was a common occurance when Windows XP came out.

Remember, just because a crime is easy to do, and everyone does it, doesn't make it any less of a crime.

If ignorance is bliss, then why is everyone so miserable?
September 12, 2002 7:41:55 PM

Quote:
What irks me more, is the people who not only steal a piece of software, but then post asking for help when they have trouble with it. It was a common occurance when Windows XP came out

rofl!! exactly.
i'd say that's my biggest gripe on piracy, there are too many people nowadays that treat pirated software like trading cards. it's funny when you can pick out the guy who is running pirated software (at least on adobe's forums) they'll come and ask a question that either:
a. common sense could tell you
b. it's in the first 10 pages of the manual.
!