Rune Central

I was just randomly looking around Quake sites when I saw one with an "Anti TCPA" banner and wondered what it was about:

http://www.againsttcpa.com

Now after reading all that I'm wondering when did all this stuff happen? Guess I'm way out of the loop now. Anyone ever heard of this?

Get thee to Slashdot, nerd!

It's a blatant attempt at establishing a thought-control / information-control society by large corporations that seek to enrich themselves. It will fail.

I really don't care if they figure out some way to make a "secure" DVD player ... but a "secure" computer ... fuck that.

(secure = big companies actually have full control of your computer to do as they please, such as delete MP3 or disallow use of non-approved software ... key point being ... approved by who? Total 100% bullshit. NFW will that happen. Imagine not being able to use a word document except on permissible computers, imagine screenprint not working for "secure" documents because of hardware embedded control. It is scary shit ... except for the fact it will fail.)

It sounds like some stuffed shirt believes he can lay a "corporate image" on the world of computing. Sort of like the locked down images big companies use so the employees can't download anything or install software not blessed by their Technology departments.

Why is that "scary" to you? If you don't like the restrictions placed on the software, simply don't use it or click "no" when the license agreement comes up during the install process. Software producers have the right to protect their property and limit its use. Do you object to trial programs having a time limit? What's the difference between renting a DVD and "renting" a MP3? If you don't like the concept of MP3s becomming unusable after a predetermined time, buy the full license.

I think the problem is that we've been conditioned to believe that material found on the internet is free and that we should be able to do anything we want w/ whats on our own computer.

I wonder where the gaming industry would be if only one person bought Quake and everyone else played w/ a copy of it.

toyo

And I think businesses should have the right to limit what is installed on a work computer and how it's used.

Imagine owning a company and being sued because one of your employees used an unlicensed version of Photoshop. Imagine losing valuable time and information because one of your employees used a trojan software. Imagine one of your employees spending all work day in a chat room on company time.

Employees work more efficiently if they're happy at work. I think most of us would rather work for a company that let's us treat our work computers as if they were our own, but I can perfectly understand why some companies choose to have strict polices.

toyo

I agree with this statement providing it doesn't impede one from getting his job done. Or in other words, that the company can manage the necessary exceptions in a timely manner.

Toyo, it is my belief that you do not truly know very much about the TCPA and why so many people hate the idea.

But the above is just a belief. I have no direct knowledge of what you know, only a suspicion that you likely know little about it (which I could be wrong).

So, I will ask you some questions that someone who knows about the TCPA would know and see your thoughts ....

1) Did you know that there are legislation attempts that would virtually impose the TCPA on us?

2) Did you know Bill Gates has been meeting with the Department of Defense?

3) Where did you get the idea this would only affect businesses ... this stuff will be shoved into our homes? When Microsoft only sells Secure XP2 operating system, where is the choice in this for the consumer.

4) Did you know that a primary concern is that Microsoft and friends would be in control of what applications could run on said "Trusted" computers?

5) They use the word "Trust", but really it allows corporations to control home users because they decide what apps can run on the OS.

6) Did you know Microsoft is making the next version media player police your computer and detect unlicensed MP3s and probably delete them? If that is permissible --- explicitly if it is permissible for a monopoly to exercise power over your computer --- why stop at MP3's? What about applications? What about documents? Where are your privacy rights in this?

7) How is it that these corporations view that they have a right to mandate to you, the consumer, that they must have access to your computer if you purchase a PC? You will be forced to accept their license agreements, after all.

This is an attempt to usurp our (PC users) rights as specified in the constitution.

I don't download MP3s or use pirated software, why is that my rights must be compromised for the sake of controlling non-law abiding citizens. This is NOT acceptable to me.

If it only affected businesses or entertainment, I wouldn't care. But Microsoft is interested in this to increase their yoke on application development to further their own software market control agenda. Intellectual property concerns are a diversion they have created so people don't notice that really what they want to do is stop Linux and Open Source and hinder all potential competitors.

Toyo, maybe you are aware of all of this, but based on your post I do not believe that to be the case.

This may be off topic but I have just one thing to say...


LINUX!!!!

..um..ok..that's.. all..um.bye

Baker:
"Toyo, it is my belief that you do not truly know very much about the TCPA and why so many people hate the idea."

I have no knowledge of TCPA nor do I consciously support them. I was merely reponding to your post.

Unless the source code and permission to modify it is given, we're at the mercy of the terms of the licensing agreement. Fortunately there are laws restricting what can be in that licensing agreement, but I think most people accept the idea that software producers should have some control over their product, even if it's bought by a consumer. The amount of control is where there is disagreement and since it's a matter of opinion, it's unlikely we will all reach a common ground.

If pivacy concerns outweigh the benefits of new software and hardware, we can opt not to use it.


"I don't download MP3s or use pirated software, why is that my rights must be compromised for the sake of controlling non-law abiding citizens. This is NOT acceptable to me."

We make compromises everyday. Metal detectors at airports, background checks when obtaining a license or job, yearly vehical inspections, IRS tax audits and the use of police radar among other privacy infringements would not be needed if everybody was law abiding. The fact of the matter is, this is not the case and never will be.


I believe the record industry should have the right to copy protect MP3s yet I've downloaded copies w/out purchase. Does that make me a hypocrite? No. Here's an anaology. It does not make me a hypocrite if I believe the police should have the right to enforce speeding limits yet speed myself. I would, on the otherhand, be a hypocrite if I preached people should not speed.

toyo

Toyo: I have no knowledge of TCPA nor do I consciously support them. I was merely reponding to your post.

Then you shouldn't comment on it! (But kudos for being honest about it)

Toyo: If pivacy concerns outweigh the benefits of new software and hardware, we can opt not to use it.

You mean like how we could choose to not use Microsoft Word or how we could choose not to use Windows or like how we could choose not you Windows Media Player for files on CNN.com that only play in that format?

Btw, in case you didn't notice ... Microsoft is a monopoly, at least if you value what our court system has ruled. There ain't a hell of a lot of choice involved here, but you appear to be oblivious to this.

X Baker:
"Then you shouldn't comment on it! (But kudos for being honest about it)"

Other than that one sentance, I have not made a single comment about TCPA. As I stated before, I was merely responding to your post. I can disagree with you yet not support TCPA's platform, whatever it maybe.

"You mean like how we could choose to not use Microsoft Word or how we could choose not to use Windows or like how we could choose not you Windows Media Player for files on CNN.com that only play in that format?"

There are alternative like StarOffice and Linux. However, if you want the features Microsoft products provide, it's your choice to use them. There are hundreds of millions of people in this world who don't use Microsoft products.

Microsoft is a monopoly. Slightly off topic, but the silver lining of having a monopoly in the software industry is that I can be instantly productive on almost any computer because of my familiarity with the OS and office suite. Yet there still is choice. Do a search on word processors and see how many hits you get.


"Microsoft should not have the ability to do things EVEN OUR GOVERNMENT CANNOT LGEALLY DO."

All legal activity by a corporation is authorized by the government. In any case, since the government is not in the software business, I don't see how this is relevant. A doctor can legally prescribe drugs but the government can not. This fact does not automatically mean what the doctor is doing is somehow underhanded.

And I can come up with examples where privacy is exchanged for voluntary involvement or the common good of both private and public institutions. When you want to get a loan, a bank or credit union will likely ask for your income, debts and general expenses. If you want to get a rental car, they'll make a copy of your driver's license. If you want to participate in an autox, your car will be tech inspected.

toyo

Toyo, by the way, please interpret these last few posts as being somewhat frustrated.

You are an A-Okay Quaker if you are honest in real life as you seem to be in Quake, you are quite a guy.

... but at the same time, because people respect you they also value your opinion. And you offered an opinion on topic that is serious, at least to many, and your opinion was VALUED by certain individuals that read your post.

There in lies my gripe. A respected individual chipping in their 2 cents on a topic without really knowing what the topic is, and as a result, others believe it.

Microsoft, and they are not quite alone, is trying to muck up things even further for their own gain and this time using "cover" of being part of a council (so they could have a lawyer say in court they didn't do this all by themselves).

Microsoft perceives Open Source as enemy #1. The best way to try to destroy open source is by placing Microsoft in a position where they can "approve" applications by other companies.

This means several things ... first .... Microsoft would have 100% market awareness, be able to review competitors products, selectively not approve or throw red tape towards competitors products

Example: "Gee, sorry Adobe, your code doesn't provide for security #1015 protocol when the app is loading a multi-user document imported from Mac OS if the document contains transparent GIFs while disk cache is turned off ... you need to go back and fix that and resubmit your application for TCPA approval again in another 6 months and have independent testing by the testing board that this is fixed."

This TCPA is very, very bad news ... I suspect it will snuff out a lot of non-large business application development if it is successful in the way Microsoft wants it to be.

Remember, Microsoft sabotaged Java on Windows computers to try to derail Java.

So when Microsoft is talking about illegal file trading and virus protection and secure documents, they have ulterior motives in mind. Those goals could be achieved WITHOUT their TCPA scheme.

Their goal is NOT fixing those problems, but rather trying to really lock down everyone to their operating system. Remember the DCMA says that basically outlaws reverse engineering to violate a copyright, meaning that if Microsoft comes up with some super-clusterfuck of a secure file format for SQL server or Word, big companies will never be able to deconvert from Microsoft products.

This TCPA is horrible, horrible, horrible. There is so much more wrong with it than what I have even said. This is the tip of the iceberg. It sucks.

Well, I'll wrap up like this (I've already shed light on how shitty the TCPA is) ....

Toyo: Other than that one sentance, I have not made a single comment about TCPA.

Check out the thread title! It reads "TCPA: Where'd this come from?"

Toyo: I can disagree with you yet not support TCPA's platform, whatever it maybe.

Read about the TCPA. Once you find in depth what this is and the implications, I believe that it is very unlikely that you would support it.


(By the way, let me add some perspective to this. I have evolved to become anti-Microsoft, but I didn't start out that way. I was rabid Microsoft fan for years, not quite enough to wait in line overnight for a copy of Windows 95 when it came out, but pretty damn close to it.

Each version of Word gets shittier and shittier. My new computer with Win XP Pro, the search for files and folders doesn't find files like it should and it isn't my PC, it is all of them. The status bar in Explorer and Internet Explorer goes away, no matter what it will not stay from session to session and it isn't my problem, it is like that for everyone. Outlook spreads viruses worse than Jack In The Box spreads mad cow disease.

I didn't leave Microsoft, Microsoft left me. It is proof that absolute power corrupts absolutely.)

Blah blah blah...

_________________
Slot Zero

Have you seen any pro-TCPA banners? I fully support this. I have read at least 5 articles and I think I have more in-depth knowledge than even Baker (aka Baker X), because I think he only read 3.

_________________
Slot Zero

>Have you seen any pro-TCPA banners? I fully support this.

Good then replace the RuneQuake servers with TCPA boxes when they come out and try to run Linux on them ... or for that matter, Quake.

You like programming ... try to use your compiler on a TCPA box or make an executable and see if anyone else can run it on a TCPA box.

Everything you and the other developers here (and myself on increasingly rare occasions) like to mess around with will become essentially impossible. 3rd party apps will largely become a thing of the past, especially freeware and shareware and other grand experiments that helped get us where we are today. Think about Open Source.

And btw, don't be surprised if a trend develops where web sites start requiring you to authenticate (reveal your identity) to use them ... I predict that many of the sites that require you to "register" today will require your to authenticate tomorrow. And don't be surprised if many application skip out on the whole "asking you if you want to authenticate" and just forcibly volunteer you to do this.

Anyone here with ZoneAlarm or another firewall can tell you just how many apps like to try to connect to HQ to "share". In the future, apps will be able to do more than that with this TCPA scheme. It will be worse than spyware.

Finally, it is my understanding that there is a provision in TCPA that allows identity checks without your knowledge under certain circumstances. Would you trust this aspect to not be abused.

Slot, I know you like to believe that you know more than other people (and on certain specialties you certainly do), but a side-effect of that mindset is a somewhat slow awareness that accompanies dismissing other's points of view.

I've never been known to be anything other than rational. This TCPA b.s. is a cartel-like attempt to try to stop new competition, cripple open source, raise barriers for new and evolving competitors, control consumers and give themselves an awefully large amount of power and leverage over consumers.

All kidding aside after reading more into the website this is some pretty scary shit and I wouldn't put it past Microsoft for one second to be in total ecstasy over something like this. Microsoft already makes you call them up and ask permission to reinstall the latest versions of Windows after it crashes your computer into oblivion don't they?