Author Topic: OK Intel gurus give me the run down here.  (Read 1870 times)

Offline Wlfgng

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5252
      • http://www.nick-tucker.com
OK Intel gurus give me the run down here.
« Reply #45 on: January 08, 2003, 09:57:25 AM »
you guys are worried about unique id's on your hardware?
you already are 'uniqely' ID'd by your modems MAC address.
every modem on the web is ID'd by this.

Offline AKDejaVu

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5049
      • http://www.dbstaines.com
OK Intel gurus give me the run down here.
« Reply #46 on: January 08, 2003, 10:40:56 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by mrsid2
"You will find that Intel has never released anything that says the above. Some people have taken a small amount of information and ran a long way with it. "

Yeah Intel is just the main driving force in developing that toejam.

Call it what you want, but once the technology gets implemented, you no longer own or administer your own computer.

Hey, if you're so fond of it you can do it even today. It's called being 0wned. Just open your ports and mellow out. :rolleyes:
Sigh...

Intel is driving it... ya right.

Dude.. you're only going to see what you want in any of this.  Intel does not care about software licensing.  In case you didn't notice... they are a hardware company.

When things go wireless... there needs to be an exclusive way to id your computer for reasons too numerous to list.  You can pretend that isn't the case all you want, but it will just make you look obtuse.

Everything you are bashing is being driven by Microsoft.  They are the ones with vested interests in licensing.  Bash them all you want.

Oh... and I feel for those that will no longer be able to "back up" copies of 3D-Max and Autocad2000.  Its a downright shame.

 :rolleyes:

AKDejaVu

Offline mrsid2

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1081
OK Intel gurus give me the run down here.
« Reply #47 on: January 08, 2003, 10:52:57 AM »
AkDeja you know as well as I do that Intel is developing the hardware lock side of things. Dunno what's your reason behind the coverup job.

You work for Intel maybe? :)

Offline AKDejaVu

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5049
      • http://www.dbstaines.com
OK Intel gurus give me the run down here.
« Reply #48 on: January 08, 2003, 11:03:02 AM »
The hardware lock side of things...

Hmmmmm.

Hardware doesn't lock things... software does... unless you know of a way for hardware to know what it should and should not be locking.

Oh.. and you may want to read that whole article... especially:
Quote
Intel and AMD appear to plan for the second generation of TCPA functionality to be provided in the main processor for free.
Get it?

BTW.. this is being promoted as an IT tool.  Something that is completely able to be disabled, unless your IT blocks it.  Now, I have worked with IT here at work quite a bit... and not once have they tried to dictate what I could and could not do with my computer at home.  At work though...

AKDejaVu

Offline Wlfgng

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5252
      • http://www.nick-tucker.com
OK Intel gurus give me the run down here.
« Reply #49 on: January 08, 2003, 11:08:20 AM »
have owned AutoCAD since version 9 and IF you own it there's no reason to back it up.  I can get free (shipping charge) media to replace if needed.

ok.. so who needs it?.. jk

Offline mrsid2

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1081
OK Intel gurus give me the run down here.
« Reply #50 on: January 08, 2003, 11:11:41 AM »
Ak if I understood right, it's made clear in that article that the technology being developed will require an 'approved' OS and 'approved' applications on the computer before it even boots up. That is quite effectively a hardware lock.

AMD first announced they were going the tcpa way, but later on they denied any participation in it.

If what you say is correct and it's only an 'IT' tool that can be disabled, it would be of no use to RIAA or others who seek to regulate the licenses with it.

I'm sure they'll be promoting this as the next coming of Jesus if they can fool people into it that way.. :)

As said, MS mediaplayer 9 already forces you to sign consent to delete software without your knowledge or permission if MS chooses to do so.

That, and a law that criminalises attempts to circumvent built-in copy protection methods pretty much mean you can't turn it off.

Offline AKDejaVu

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5049
      • http://www.dbstaines.com
OK Intel gurus give me the run down here.
« Reply #51 on: January 08, 2003, 11:21:05 AM »
They can deny participation in its development all they want.  If they are going to brake into the buisness sector, they will need it.

And, the hardware is told what to check.  That is what makes it a software setup.  If you work IT, you could see exactly why this would be desireable.

There is nothing that says it will only let a home user only load certain software.  It says itself that the feature can be disabled.

Once again... you are only seeing what you want to see.

AKDjeaVu

Offline AKDejaVu

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5049
      • http://www.dbstaines.com
OK Intel gurus give me the run down here.
« Reply #52 on: January 08, 2003, 11:23:42 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by mrsid2
As said, MS mediaplayer 9 already forces you to sign consent to delete software without your knowledge or permission if MS chooses to do so.
You're talking software again.  And I didn't see this stated in the article.  I saw that Microsoft makes you agree to future federal regulations regarding the issue, but not that it should be able to arbitrarily delete items.

It was a play on words that seems to have worked.  If you have a problem with that, you may want to talk to your congressman.  He's the one that's going to have to vote in that type of thing.

AKDejaVu

Offline mrsid2

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1081
OK Intel gurus give me the run down here.
« Reply #53 on: January 08, 2003, 11:28:17 AM »
Once again I'm only seeing the possibilities given with this kind of tech. It says this it says that.. Then one day when majority has this tech they say what they want. Orwell couldn't even dream about this stuff and now it's becoming a reality.

AK the MP9 thing wasn't in the article but it's common knowledge. Hardware or software alone can't do squat, but if they're built in a way that they force you to use the combo, then it's effective.

The way I see it is that they'll introduce this to people a bit like creative sneaks in its software.. You can't use the hd functions of their mp3 players without installing their software which is not so nice since it often porks your OS.

Ever heard the saying wolf in lambs clothing? I wouldn't trust a word. Give the devil your little finger and it'll take the hand..

And btw I work IT so I know well what this means. On a professional and marketing side this sounds great.. But as a private person I can't allow any third party to access my data let alone choose what I may or may not hold on my hd.

But naturally the choice is yours.. You can just close your eyes and pretend nothing's happening. Maybe it'll just go away.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2003, 11:38:38 AM by mrsid2 »

Offline AKDejaVu

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5049
      • http://www.dbstaines.com
OK Intel gurus give me the run down here.
« Reply #54 on: January 08, 2003, 11:38:16 AM »
Well.. at least you're giving up the "Its only Intel... not AMD" sales pitch.

And I think you don't quite have the faith in the voters, customers and taxpayers that you should have.

There was something called DivX that was supposed to be similar to the dastardly "Listen 3 times CD" mentioned in that article.  Any idea why it failed?

Any idea why you can purchase telephones for your house?

The tendancy is usually toward less regulation... not more.  The only thing to be even remotely "worried" about is copyright infringement.  And I doubt that will make it past many watch dog groups.  But if it does... there'll be alot of people squeaking that that diddlying microsoft actually wants them to pay for the OS they've been using for free for 7 years.

AKDejaVu

Offline mrsid2

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1081
OK Intel gurus give me the run down here.
« Reply #55 on: January 08, 2003, 11:44:52 AM »
Ak there are huge amounts of people that can't even see the dangers invested in this. That is why there is a real danger that bills will be passed which will give out too much power to corporates and/or governments.

There are already monopoly accusations against MS.. There are already complaints from hardware manufacturers because MS presses them to sign contracts that more or less force them to distribute MS OS's with new computers etc. If they have even the slightest chance to limit competition via this (say, stop Linux from booting on the puter for example) they will.

I really hope it would be as easy as you seem to picture it..

But it's for sure that the day I have to give third parties access to my computer so they can regulate the contents, I will quit using it.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2003, 11:47:23 AM by mrsid2 »

Offline AKDejaVu

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5049
      • http://www.dbstaines.com
OK Intel gurus give me the run down here.
« Reply #56 on: January 08, 2003, 12:13:36 PM »
Umm.. you do realize that Microsoft's anti-trust suits would hinder them here as opposed to helping them... right?

Microsoft can in no way limit a pc to run only their software.  They day they do that, they will be broken up.

Microsoft CAN impliment controls that mean you can only run a VALID COPY OF THEIR OS without violating anti-trust laws.

One would be bad, the other would be... well... valid.

But that's not really what this system is about.  You'll know when it happens, because more than just a few fringe articles will appear on it.  These things are not simply "slid" in.

The "news" posted in the cited article is pure conjecture and hype based.  Sorry... but its true.

AKDejaVu

Offline Wlfgng

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5252
      • http://www.nick-tucker.com
OK Intel gurus give me the run down here.
« Reply #57 on: January 08, 2003, 12:33:11 PM »
IMO if you're doing nothing 'wrong' why worry who's watching?

Offline AKDejaVu

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5049
      • http://www.dbstaines.com
OK Intel gurus give me the run down here.
« Reply #58 on: January 08, 2003, 12:36:41 PM »
Umm.. that's totally the wrong attitude.

That's also why Intel has done this in conjunction with several privacy groups to prevent such a thing.

AKDejaVu

Offline mrsid2

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1081
OK Intel gurus give me the run down here.
« Reply #59 on: January 08, 2003, 02:52:01 PM »
The biggest boogie-man here aren't the corporations in the end.

They may use the system to milk you but that's basically it.

The worst risk in allowing third parties regulate your data is that the government will start to use it for thier purposes. One day they may pass a bill that makes having pornography on your computer illegal. Delete. Just one example..

That would suck wouldnt it? We all love pr0n.

The intelligence agencies may use it to eavesdrop your activities and covertly manipulate or destroy data on your computer if they don't approve what you're doing etc. etc. Saves them the trouble of tapping into anything, they'll just use the built in functions to monitor you.

The system allows 'digital 1984' to happen. It allows Big Brother in a major way. Actually it's THE tool to make it happen.

This is what I worry in the end.

Never before has there been a medium for corporations or governments to access your everyday routines without you knowing or most important without our consent. Never before have they been able to manipulate your files, papers whatever without you knowing (well unless agents actually came to your house, broke in and did it..) or without your consent.

How do they define which MP3's are illegal? What if you make your own music and pack them with mp3? How do you ensure privacy of your home movies if a third party has access to them? They'll have to view them to judge if they're legal or not :eek:
There's no way in hell that the day won't come when the RIAA worker who's in charge of evaluating 'suspicious' files will find your home movie so good he can't help but share it with his closest friend. And only with him/her of course.

If the tool is there, sooner or later someone is going to make use of it. Maybe it will start with tracking terrorists.. Then they find it useful to track down major criminals.. Before you know it the agency has tapped in every computer linked in the states and they actively search anti-government etc. data from your computers. You might be blacklisted for making a joke etc.

Hell, they're already doing it through the net traffic.

I've seen what constant spying and constant loss of freedom of speech does and in my opinnion this progress clearly opens up dark visions.

Or maybe things will keep simple: We'll have one palladium machine which we use to do net transactions, buy music movies, shop hardware etc.. And then we'll have one non-palladium machine which we use for private stuff.

The trouble is that RIAA is lobbying to implement mandatory copy protection systems to ALL hardware. I have no idea how that will work or affect our privacy. I'm just suspicious it won't have a positiove effect.