Comment Re: We've seen this one before... (Score 1) 40
Oh shit, you're right. Thanks for helping me get my...oh whatever, go eat a dick, AC.
Oh shit, you're right. Thanks for helping me get my...oh whatever, go eat a dick, AC.
It's on *rails*.
So what? Ruby is, and still it crashes all the time, too.
It was lead, you pleb
s/ that one.
A solar sail on an asteroid to change it's trajectory? You can't be serious.
in the end, the DRM'ed content has to be accessible
NO, IT DOESN'T.
What good is a movie, Mr. Anderson, if there's no way actually to watch it?
Yes! Hard elastic collisions please! Nevermind it completely shatters your body then instead of the car.
I whole-heartedly agree with what you say, but please keep in mind that no matter what the strategy, in the end, the DRM'ed content has to be accessible, and therefore can be grabbed and stripped of the DRM one way or another.
Frankly, if the content is video, there is no "equivalent to showing an image of text". How would you go about it, hide the video and instead publish an audio file that describes the movie?
DRM is shit, and if the new DRM in firefox can't be disabled at runtime, then i'll disable it at compile time, and if it can't be disabled at compile-time, i'll patch it out. It's just probably not the end of freedom on the internet, for "us geeks" anyway. Maybe it is for average users, but as you correctly point out yourself, those tend to not care. So why care about them?
Stop the thoughtcrime already.
I don't see how it's a goalpost change since I didn't change your original statement except omitting the meaningless "you can think of" part. Now that it's clear that your argument actually (and intentionally, it seems) depended on me failing to think of sufficient such devices, then i don't think i want to continue this stupid conversation.
you have to admit that there are a very large number of commercial devices with busybox on them.
I don't deny that, but in comparison to the much greater number of commercial devices without busybox on them, it doesn't strik me as too significant.
You said it didn't get used commercially,
I also said this has gotten better lately. You should pay better attention since you obviously expect me to do the same.
There's an implicit "unless you *really* know what you're doing" to the sentence, which just tends to not be the case for most people, which is mainly because most people aren't crypto nerds, and the consequences of failing crypto are typically serious. Much more serious than doing your own science at home (provided you aren't going nuclear; "don't do your own nuclear science at home" doesn't sound so absurd, does it?) and ending up with wrong results, or composing music and ending up with horrible garbage.
What is this legitimate-ware you're speaking of and where do I get some?
The cost of searching for the right information again is generally higher than the cost of leaving the tab open.
I often reach a point where the cost of searching for the right tab is higher than the cost of searching for the right information again...
You're doing it wrong.
Any circuit design must contain at least one part which is obsolete, two parts which are unobtainable, and three parts which are still under development.