That's quite in-character for the OT God. He demands absoute loyalty and obedience, and a number of stories in the old testament are about him either requiring this loyalty be proven or showing what happens when it isn't. There are a number of occasions where he gives what seem like trivial, unimportant instructions (Do not eat the fruit, do not look at the burning city, do not touch the ark) then executes someone on the spot for some tiny violation. The entire story of Job is supposed to demonstrate the virtue of unquestioning obedience: God (Via his assistant) unleashes all manner of misery and suffering upon Job, killing his family, ruining him financially and inflicting him with horrible diseases entirely to show that Job, as a loyal Jew, will remain obedient and loyal no matter what circumstances throw at him - and sure enough, at the end, God restores his health and wealth. Though not the dead family.
It's good drama. A direct physical conflict between opposing characters, and one that allows the story to advance rapidly. It's a lot more exciting then having to put the case on hold for a day while the investigators file paperwork requesting a search warrant.
I also notice that in any crime series, if the suspect calls for their lawyer at any point they are *always* guilty of something - but innocent people never have their lawyer present. It seems that only the guilty have any reason to exercise their legal rights in TV-land. The innocent have nothing to fear from the police.
They are supposed to be discouraged from this though, because in practice 'reading body language' very often turns into 'everyone who isn't white is acting shifty.'
Is this just Sky blocking ineptly? Or is this an accidentally-on-purpose overblock to force CDN providers to voluntarily kick off torrent sites and refuse to do business with them in future?
Or on the GPU - which means you'll only be able to play DRMed 4k if you've got a PlayReady3.0-certified video card. Intel HD video may incorporate the GPU onto the same die as the CPU, but it's a logically distinct component - as far as software is concerned it's just another PCI-e card.
I tried to find out, but I got nothing: Microsoft has published a fair bit of material about how effective the new DRM will be, but nothing at all about the technical side. Not publically, anyway - I expect that material is only available to potential customers, under an NDA.
They gain exclusivity. If the latest content is available only on this new PlaysReady 3.0 DRM system, that means it's a Windows-only feature. Want to watch Netflix in 2017 on linux? Can't do that! It'll be encrypted and only under Windows will decryption be possible. Watch a 4k-blu-ray? Nope, Windows only! Apple may have the clout to negotiate some alternative DRM scheme, but linux et all certainly won't. This creates a barrier to all non-Windows OS: A capability they lack and that people want, much as used to be the situation with DVD before it was fully cracked.
It also drives upgrades, which is a serious concern to MS. Their biggest competitor isn't linux, it's themselves from ten years ago. Look how they struggle to get people to move away from XP - it's inevitable that the situation will repeat with Windows 7. What they need is some new in-demand feature that is only supported on their latest OS. Like 4K video playing.
If I were working for the evil empire and designing a DRM scheme with a hardware GPU component, I wouldn't have the video going into the frame buffer at all. The buffer will just contain lots of black pixels. The video goes in a seperate area of memory, partitioned off, which cannot be accessed by anything on the PCI-e interface at all. The GPU just overlays it into the image as the final step before it goes into the HDMI/HDCP logic for transmission.
The only reason linux can even play DVD is that CSS has more holes than the Conservative party budget proposal.
The video is compressed. It needs to be decompressed for playback. This can only be done by the processor. This means a vital link in the chain is software - and therein lies the weakness.
Under normal living-room conditions, you need a side-by-size comparison to tell 720p from 1080p. Anything more is just a gimmick.
The 'creator's life' bit breaks down when you've got a work with many creators - a film might have a few hundred people directly contributing to the finished product. That's why the US goes for a fixed 95-year term for works-for-hire.
There's a simple reason for that. Disney (branded) films are blockbusters - they have a huge production budget, hundreds of millions. The studio can't risk that much money on something new and untested, it might flop and cost them a fortune. If you're spending such a heap of cash you have to go with ideas that have a proven history of financial success - the stock cliches, or a remake or sequal. Low-budget films can afford to be more experimental.
The UK has a fifty-year term now. We extended ours just last year to seventy years, in order to match a European standardisation directive. The EU governmnent wants to get a unified term in all member states, and as a reduction in term anywhere would lead to very well-funded opposition, that means we all go up to match the longest term. Seventy years.
What does punishment achieve? Makes people feel a bit better? The crime has been done: The focus of the justice system should be on minimizing future crimes, and punishment should be regarded only as a tool towards that end. Not a means to satisfy some perverse public desire to see others suffer so they can feel like some scales have been balanced.