the web is the subset of strongly interlinked freely available content. DRM content can be provided as part of the internet, but does not belong to the web.

And very well suited for this type of rhetoric question like in the article ... because the author doesn't provide any arguments, he is convinced of, so he puts a question in the title instead of a hypothesis (without questionmark)

nope. because part of html5 means, no NS-plugin-interface anymore, but each browser needs to implement it. But the real DRM module implementing the encryption cannot be opensource, so goodbye firefox, chromium, etc.

a standard won't mean any benefit to you. The DRM module is still closed source, missing important updates and not available for every os, maybe not even for every browser.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines

So no
use English;

if it would be implemented that way, the attackers would steal passwd, shadow AND honeywd. Nothing gained.
It will only gain something, as long as the honeyword-response is done by a blackbox, which can start an alarm when its asked for a honeyword.

Yes. Companies won't publish their products without DRM. you want to consume the products. So there is a good reason.

yeah, but better than nothing.

maybe somebody wants to fork prism and make it run with current xulrunner? It cannot be a big deal, as long as you need no new features.

wrong end. they want to block the entry nodes. and this is a known attack, elsewhere other people are already trying this, and there is a solution: bridge nodes. tor is build to enable you to connect to it, even when somebody wants to stop you. so good luck, guys.

you can try chromium --app for that ... but i liked the mozilla version.

sad, mozilla stopped developing prism ... facebook is such a good usecase for it.

Aurora Borealis? In your kitchen?!

Why is heise.de no hyperlink, slashdot?

> implying, there is the #ifdef line