Microsoft is aggressively pursuing digital rights management while simultaneously raising the cost of their software and systems. TCPA based computers are already on the market, and over the next two years this technology will have more and more impact on how consumers can use their computers.

Consumers will buy TCPA. They will buy it because they are being told that it protects them from viruses and hackers. However, when the DRM capabilities of this technology begin to rear their heads, consumers will be unhappy.

If consumers accept DRM with open arms this will be unprecedented. Previous efforts like DIVX failed miserably. Consumers don't choose products that limit their capabilities.

As these developments occur over the next two years, their are two platforms that will present themselves as viable options.

One is Apple. Apples can do pretty much anything you can do with your PC, with the same files. Apples suck less. (They are FAR from perfect, but they suck less.) They are expensive, but they also do not have DRM. Apple has clearly stated they don't believe DRM will actually work.

The other is Linux. Linux as a desktop isn't THERE yet. Its still clunky. But its ALMOST there, and companies like Lindows selling desktop linux machines at Walmart are incented to get it there. I can certainly imagine the remaining rough edges being smoothed out within the next two years.

So just as the Wintel platform begins telling you "I can't do that, dave." when you ask it to rip your CDs, a number of viable platform options will be reaching maturity.

However, while the home user's interest in information freedom might cause a large migration to Apple and Linux in the consumer market,
the corporate IT market may be very happy with TCPA. Corporate IT has intellectual property management and system administration needs that are well met by TCPA. It allows them to deploy desktops that
their employees can't really control. Central control means consistency and compliance. If general market conditions don't improve the price advantage of linux will look very attractive to corporate buyers, but if they have leeway to make expensive capital expenditures then the large companies will buy TCPA.

So the result that you may see by 2005 is a situation where most people use UNIX in the home and WINDOWS in the office.

There are a couple of caveats here:

1. The government: The government could pass laws making DRM mandatory, or limiting peoples ability to emulate popular windows file formats.

2. Mozilla. Mozilla is clunky. Its bad on linux. Its worse on OSX. IE is just plain better technology. Of all of the Microsoft products that I have used over the years, I am most impressed with it, except on the Mac, where their page rendering is a generation behind the times.

The web is the central part of our computing experience today, and for the forseeable future. If Mozilla doesn't improve, then these options will not be viable. Apple and the various linux vendors should invest in Mozilla's maturity.

I think there are a lot of implications of this for the copyright conflict, anti-trust conflicts, internet standards, etc...

What do YOU think?

] "The inescapable conclusion of this analysis of the
] 'knowledge management' idea is that it is, in large part,
] a management fad, promulgated mainly by certain
] consultancy companies, and the probability is that it
] will fade away like previous fads. It rests on two
] foundations: the management of information - where a
] large part of the fad exists (and where the 'search and
] replace marketing' phenomenon is found), and the
] effective management of work practices."

The nonsense of 'knowledge management'

] At the annual Comdex trade show to be held in Las Vegas
] next week, Microsoft and computer display makers will
] show off so-called "smart displays."

Microsoft is going in the right direction here. I think that these will be popular WHEN the price goes down. Right now there is no sense in sending $1,200 on a portable dumb terminal when I can get a laptop for the same amount of money. When these things cost $500, they'll take off...

ABCNEWS.com : Portable Displays for Wireless PC Work

this is elonka's talk on steganography from phreaknic. elonka is a bad ass cypher freak. the slides are well worth 15 minutes of your time. some reasonable thought about the likelyhood that al-q actually used stegaNography in images tO conceal Their plans for 911. jonnyx's goggled face offers clear evidence that universities that have searched for stego on the web and not found it simply have not tried hard enough. the reader is left to ponder the possible.

Elonka.Com - Steganography

In the UK, this service will ID "any" song played into your cellphone.

I wonder if there is a market for a service that simply records all the audio you play into it and makes it all available via web-dav.

just hit 2580 on your mobile phone and identify music

A few weeks ago someone called me from a rock concert in Texas, held the phone up, and told me to listen to one of the songs. The person in this email claimed they were busted by security at a rolling stones concert for doing the same thing. Ubiquitous cell phones means ubiquitous audio recording (and surveillance), ubiquitous cameras, and soon video. What are the implications of this? For privacy? IP? Media?

Cellphones and copyright

] I'm talking about this: http://techlist.org/slashdot.jpg.
] It's annoying, because I have to scroll through a whole page
] of those before I get to a comment. Why would I want to look
] at an entire page of links to the exact same thing, with no
] comments? Am I missing something? I often am!

What you and Randy are both missing is that Memestreams is not a finished product.

1. There is no way for me to tell the difference between when someone simply links to a page and when someone provides a link along with commentary. The purpose of the threaded view is to allow you to find out what people are thinking about a particular link. I want all that information in one place, so that in the future when you are out in the internet and you click on the discussion bookmarklet you get everything that people are saying about a URL.

2. There are going to be hundreds of posts on each URL at some point in the future. It should be obvious that the current method of viewing the threads is temporary. There is a reputation system in MemeStreams for a reason. You will ultimately be able to sort the discussions for highly rated posts and posters just as you can on slashdot/kuro5hin, but based on a multi-higharchical reputation system instead of a mono-higharchical moderation oligarchy.

3. A lot of people are going to have very similar things to say about a url. There is no way that I can eliminate similar posts. The technology to do that properly simply does not exist, anywhere. The reputation system will allow you to filter threads for posts made by your highest ranked posters, the highest ranked posts in the thread, a hybrid view of those two, and for posts made after a certain timeframe. That should be more then effective at cutting the threads down to size.

This is not in place right now because:

1. Writing code takes time.
2. I JUST posted the threading code a week ago. In most places this kind of capability isn't needed yet.
3. I wanted to get the discussion capability out before the presentation at phreaknic. I didn't want to hold it off for a month because I needed to work on this filtering capability.

It will not be in place until I am able to get some of the database scalability fixed up.

Yesterday Randy called me up all annoyed because he didn't think the discussion bookmarklet was in an "intuitive location." Look, I'm not stupid. I have previously stated that I cut a lot of corners to get the discussion code out before Phreaknic. There will be minor details that are not right. This isn't because I don't realise that they need to be different. This is because in the interest of time some things have been given a higher priority then other things.

RE: Quit Slashdot.org Today!

] "A missing chapter from hacker Kevin Mitnick's recent
] book has been published on the Internet."

After nearly a decade, Mitnick's voice is heard.

Wired News: Mitnick's 'Lost Chapter' Found

"An attack on the software license behind the Linux operating system has stirred up a free software controversy in Washington."

This is getting a lot of coverage and I want to comment on it.

1. This is the right letter for the wrong reasons. The goverment SHOULDN'T release GPLed code. GPL is not public domain. BSD is public domain. GPL forces you to distribute your source code if you develop tools on top of GPLed code. Many organizations cannot distribute source code because they are trying to protect trade secrets. The BSD license makes code available for use by the broadest set of interests, with both open and closed source models. The government shouldn't be imposing a particular perspective on how software is supposed to work, especially when the matter is far from closed in the private sector. We can revisit this in the future if most organizations are releasing GPLed code.

2. "Why don't we also reject any software patents and copyrights that could discourage the adoption and use of software developed under federal funds?" Spafford asked. What is important is what is not being said. Federal funds should not be used to develop technology which is not placed in the public domain. This is just as important on the copyright side as it is on the copyleft side.

A more balanced statement about the need for government research to be placed in the public domain would have been much more effective. Its unlikely that Smith's constituency was not influential in the nature of this statement. Furthermore, a lot of the funding for major GPLed projects comes from the federal government, so attacking this funding serves an obvious interest. As a result the general outrage about the letter is not misplaced. However, I agree. Government research should not be GPLed.

Wired News: Letter: Free Software Hurts U.S.

"Why is the Internet supported by only 13 root-server arrays? Are there no other data centers on the planet qualified to support top-level domain service? Is there no better architecture than a root arrangement? Most importantly, why is ICANN in charge of the Internet, and to whom is it accountable? "

Getting political on the recent attacks.

Perspective: Waiting for the Net meltdown - Tech News - CNET.com