So you have to upload your book to somewhere secret where you trust and hope Mr Bookz will will strip out your id. And if your uploaded book does leak into the wild (because Mr Bookz is an asshole or incompetent about stripping the id), you've just incriminated yourself for no reason. If there is a book in the wild already why risk uploading another copy at all? Why even buy a copy in the first place if you are uploading books and therefore not especially concerned about the ethics of piracy?
Of course I suppose 1000 people could crowd compile a book, each submitting a page each to produce a frankenbook from the pieces but it would still have to be canonicalized in case the markup, contents, style rule names embedding the id somehow. Perhaps the frankenbook would hash each canonicalized page and the pages that have the same hash are used when the book is stitched together.
But for all the effort maybe it's easier to scan the paper book in the first place, or hook up a cracked Kindle / Nook / tablet to a flat bed scanner or a screen capture device and make extensive use of analogue hole to strip out most of the watermark.
In summary, it would be a hard problem to crack.
Someone would have to possess an another copy of the same book (more or less defeating the point of sharing the their own and incurring a personal risk) in the same published form in order to even know that the differences were intentional. Even then it doesn't make them easy to remove, if for example style names or other marks in the book were randomized.
Similar measures would have easily found the culprit of a mass leak of information like wikileaks. Every page could contain 1 bit of variation based on the user's id and the result page. Each bit you could glean from a page would cut the search space of culprits in half so you'd nail the perp in no time. Even if the document was canonicalized it cannot strip out all the ways that this bit of variation could be sent and wikileaks would be extremely unlikely to be in possession of two independent copies of the same document to even know what to look for.
As for it being "expensive", most PCs are more expensive again. Guess which platform suffers worse piracy. Cost has nothing to do with it so much as lack of copy protection or circumvention controls.
But OtherOS really never attracted a whole amount of interest before the threat of removal became a reality. Then people who never used it were whining to the high heavens about evil Sony. Of course Sony was just protecting their platform - removing an esoteric feature which was massively exploitable. I expect the PS3 would died a death if piracy had taken hold and one way to ensure that was to leave OtherOS in there.
- Watch their multi billion investment and revenue model go to shit as a viable exploit allowed people install to custom firmware primarily to play warez. Even if the exploit were experimental to begin with but you can guarantee that it would be perfected to the point that burning and booting from an ISO would root a PS3. Even if Sony patched this exploit there would likely be another, and another, and another.
- Take out OtherOS and thus the entire risk and endure some whining from people, most of whom never used it in the first place and probably never would have either.
It sucks it was taken out (and I had used it myself BTW). But what would have sucked a LOT more is seeing the console I spent a lot of money go into terminal decline as it became a wasteland of shovelware shit because piracy was endemic. Or if the multiplayer was taken over cheating bastards and griefers thanks to modded firmware.
Given that the PS3 was the least pirated console of this generation by a large margin I would suggest that Sony got something right even if they angered some people in the process.
I'm not sure I trust Sony not to be an asshole regarding DRM. It doesn't have that good a track record. It is a good bet the moment the marketing hype dies down, and the stock holders start pressing, they will tighten their DRM.
I expect Sony's gameplan is to push really hard on PSN+ and digital downloads (which are non transferrable) with the expectation in the fullness of time that physical discs will simply die out. So no point kicking up shit about it especially when it's a chance to deliver a well aimed kick in the balls to Microsoft.
Of course on the flip side, Microsoft could potentially install the full disc onto the HDD and let you play it without the disc at all since it's unique (embedded serial somewhere) and bound to your account now. I could see that being a significant advantage.
Android really needs to ask the user to grant / deny a permission each time it is accessed, with a checkbox to remember the decision. Some apps can be incredibly annoying, such as Facebook which is constantly turning on GPS which saps battery power. I should be able to disable that permission and force it to use a less precise location system or none at all. Another app might have a genuine need to launch the dialler, to call someone in its contacts list, but I want to be asked each time just so it doesn't surreptitiously dial a premium number in Ghana during the night. Perhaps for numbers, it's the number which is added to a whitelist when I say remember the decision. And so on.
Apps might also have installed broadcast receivers / services which might hit permissions. They could be suspended until I grant / deny the permission they require. Perhaps I can completely disable these receivers / services from running at all except when their app is in the foreground.