Readit News logoReadit News
ethin commented on Valve: HDMI Forum Continues to Block HDMI 2.1 for Linux   heise.de/en/news/Valve-HD... · Posted by u/OsrsNeedsf2P
throwaway2037 · 6 days ago

    > and at most doing what NVMe does where you pay membership dues
No trolling: What is the difference between "pay[ing] membership dues" and paying a fee to access the standard (docs)? To me, they feel the same.

ethin · 6 days ago
Honest answer (since your not trolling): The difference is more of time than anything else. If I somehow find $5000 to buy access to the PCIe spec, my understanding is that it's per access request. NVMe doesn't charge at all for their specifications; instead, you can join for just $500 per year last time I checked.
ethin commented on Valve: HDMI Forum Continues to Block HDMI 2.1 for Linux   heise.de/en/news/Valve-HD... · Posted by u/OsrsNeedsf2P
themafia · 6 days ago
> Instead, people want to capitalize on someone else's hard work for free.

This would only make sense if there _wasn't_ free video standards competing with HDMI. How is it that one group managed to do this for free yet the other group charges clearly exorbitant rates for a nearly equivalent product.

> They own IP.

That isn't nearly as valuable as they say it is. They only do this to prevent piracy and not to promote any useful technical standard.

> People want to use that IP.

People are _forced_ to because the same group practically gives away their technology under certain conditions so their connectors get added to nearly every extant device. I don't _want_ to use HDMI. I'm simply _forced_ to through market manipulation.

> want to make money.

Selling drugs would earn them more money. Why don't we tolerate that? It could be, under some torturous logic, be just another "standard business practice." In fact looking at our laws I see tons of "standard business practices" that are now flatly illegal.

The law is a tool. It can be changed. It should be changed. The citizens pay for 85% of it and while businesses only pay 7%. Why do their "standard practices" hold a candle to the "needs of the citizens."

ethin · 6 days ago
Same thing applies to PCI. I can get USB specs for free from USB-IF. But the PCI and PCIe specs cost $4000 plus. Just so I can write my own PCI driver. Legally, I mean. Oh, there is external references, but what if I want the authoritative documentation? Should I have to pay thousands and thousands for access (!) to a standard that is ubiquitous in every sense of the word? There is, to me, a point at which ubiquity trumps any "IP rights" the standards org would have.
ethin commented on Valve: HDMI Forum Continues to Block HDMI 2.1 for Linux   heise.de/en/news/Valve-HD... · Posted by u/OsrsNeedsf2P
MisterTea · 7 days ago
> Then you wouldn't have 3G cellular. Or 4G. Or 5G cellular.

I don't get it. Why would making a standard freely accessible impede its adoption?

ethin · 7 days ago
Yeah, I'm curious about this too. I would think that making a standard freely available (and at most doing what NVMe does where you pay membership dues) would make the standard be adopted far more universally than putting up weird barriers to even access the standard.
ethin commented on Valve: HDMI Forum Continues to Block HDMI 2.1 for Linux   heise.de/en/news/Valve-HD... · Posted by u/OsrsNeedsf2P
mahkoh · 7 days ago
VESA makes you pay $5000 to get legal access to the DisplayPort standard. That is not the issue here.
ethin · 7 days ago
It is part of the issue here. This specific post is about the HDMI forum having an insanely restrictive NDA, but the broader problem of SDOs charging obscene amounts of money for what amounts to trivially reproduceable digital documents (or taking other measures to do everything they can to seal the standards from the public unless your willing to pay the obscene fees or <insert other absurd measure here>) is relevant to this post, and this comment, since the HDMI forum is doing exactly this kind of gatekeeping; it only differs in form, but not function.
ethin commented on Valve: HDMI Forum Continues to Block HDMI 2.1 for Linux   heise.de/en/news/Valve-HD... · Posted by u/OsrsNeedsf2P
ethin · 7 days ago
We really need to just force all standards organizations to release their standards for free. No making you pay $300 or whatever for a standard. (The PCI SIG makes you pay like $5000 for access to the PCIe standard...)
ethin commented on Australia begins enforcing world-first teen social media ban   reuters.com/legal/litigat... · Posted by u/chirau
falaki · 7 days ago
Alcohol, tobacco and many other products have age restrictions, so do cars and many other products of the modern society. Social media can and should have age restrictions.
ethin · 7 days ago
This is a nonsense take that gets perpetuated over and over. For some reason.

Purchasing alcohol or buying a car is not the same as verifying your age on an internet property. They aren't even comparable. This is just as dumb as saying "well you have to verify your age to go into a bar". Sure, but does the bartender or salesman who sells you the alcohol completely remember every pixel of your photo or video selfy, permanently? Or do they just remember your face more generally?

The problem with these age verification laws is that they harm everybody, adults and kids. They don't do anything to protect kids and their sole purpose is a way for governments to suppress things they don't like. Any age verification technology (be it age estimation or similar) has a permanent record of the photo ID or video selfies (or whatever you use to prove your age) that you give it. Forever. If these systems didn't have those records, the result would be you having to verify your age every time you visit the website. There is a massive, massive difference between getting alcohol at a bar, or going to a strip club or similar, and providing your photo ID to a bouncer or bartender, who probably won't remember your ID after 5 minutes, versus a computer which permanently remembers it. That is the differentiator.

ethin commented on Australia begins enforcing world-first teen social media ban   reuters.com/legal/litigat... · Posted by u/chirau
naravara · 7 days ago
I think 70-80% of it is the business model, but the other 20-30% might just be baked into how it is.

Jonathan Haidt talks about how once social media usage became ubiquitous among teenagers around 2015 mental health problems began to skyrocket. And a big part of this was the algorithm serving up content designed to make people feel bad, but another part around feelings of being bullied turned out to largely be kids seeing their friends hanging out with each other without inviting them and this provoking feelings of alienation. That’s inevitable, I felt bad when I found out about parties or hang-outs I didn’t get invited to at that age as well. But I didn’t even know about 90% of them, and those I did I heard about through passing references rather than a stream of pictures and albums about how much fun everyone was having without me.

I think some level of a sense of isolation is inevitable under those circumstances, though I’m not sure that by itself would rise to the level of banning it outright. At least not before trying other interventions like addressing Meta’s “19 strikes before banning you for CSAM” rule. Kids are just the canaries in the coal mine here. Whatever these services are doing that is cooking developing brains is still turning up the heat on adult brains too, we can’t try to pretend we can be psychologically healthy engaging with something that we know is spiking depression and anxiety in our kids.

The culture of interacting just changed as more people got online and more tools became available to expand access to things. You used to just be able to have an unsecured comment section where anyone could come to your website and directly modify the page’s HTML and most of the time nothing would happen. You ought to have sanitized your inputs but there just wasn’t this background miasma that was going to flood your comment section full of spam, scans, and injecting malware into the page if you left an open text-entry box on the internet. Once it hit a certain scale and there was a certain amount of money in it then a lot of mess came with them.

ethin · 7 days ago
Jonathan Haidt is someone who nobody should take seriously. Pretty much all of the data he cites is cherry-picked and the vast majority of people in trust and safety and similar will tell you that he is probably one of the least reliable authorities on this subject. He's aiming to sell fear, not to actually solve the problem.
ethin commented on Australia begins enforcing world-first teen social media ban   reuters.com/legal/litigat... · Posted by u/chirau
ethin · 7 days ago
And, of course, as usual, this law, like all it's others in the rest of the world, will do absolutely nothing in protecting kids. It will instead only create a huge national security hacker paradise because everyone will use these so-called "age verification" services, which aren't exactly known for their security.
ethin commented on Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros   about.netflix.com/en/news... · Posted by u/meetpateltech
ethin · 12 days ago
This entire Warner Bros saga has just been insanely pathetically sad to watch, because it demonstrates that WB has completely lost touch with reality and that the C-suites at the top have zero innovation or anything else to give at this point. The company has gone through so many megamergers and acquisitions which just added more and more debt to the company that at this point it wouldn't surprise me if Netflix just declares bankruptcy with it or something, because it's a completely lost cause. Of course, the people responsible for this won't learn a thing (even though they're making the exact mistakes of the Cable industry they replaced), and will continue doing the same thing over and over again, because, clearly, learning from mistakes is just not possible for these people.
ethin commented on Reverse engineering a $1B Legal AI tool exposed 100k+ confidential files   alexschapiro.com/security... · Posted by u/bearsyankees
ethin · 14 days ago
I'll be honest... I'm not at all surprised that this happened. Purely because it seems like everyone who wants to implement AI just forgot all of the institutional knowledge that cybersecurity has acquired over the last 30-40 years. When you "forget" all of that because you want to rush out something really fast, well, you know what they say: play stupid games, win stupid prizes and all that.

u/ethin

KarmaCake day410September 6, 2020
About
I'm a computer science graduate with experience in embedded systems seeking to get a career in software engineering. In my free time I love learning all kinds of things, working on complex projects in various programming languages such as C++ and Rust, etc.
View Original