• Whirling_Cloudburst@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    There needs to be a widespread p2p solution for opensource projects before its too late. I have lost count of all the amazing stuff that has been gravity bombed from orbit.

    There also needs to be a way for authors to submit things anonymously too and maybe sign their things with cryptographic keys to ID it. How many times has a company had a court order someone to cease and desist or simply acquire somebody’s work?

    • solrize@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 days ago

      p2p solution for opensource projects

      That’s called Git and it’s been around longer than GitHub. There is also Usenet which by now is mostly dead. People fell for centralized alternatives. Oops :)

      • Womble@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        4 days ago

        Git is, but it has no process of discovery or hosting by itself. Those are needed to efficiently share open source software to large numbers of people.

      • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        Right? Git is literally decentralized. If you choose to use GitHub as a centralized Git service, that’s on you.

        (I will caveat this by saying we moved 2009scape off GitHub and the number of new contributors probably got cut in half. Mainstream services have a lot more eyes)

        • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          How come Git is decentralized?
          Doesnt it need a central component so I can pull your changes?

          Edit: Thanks to all that explained it to me :)

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      All you need for this is a global overlay network and a global DNS untied from physical infrastructure. Cryptographic identities (hash of pubkey will do) instead of IP addresses (because NATs are PITA and too many people use mobile devices behind big bad NATs), and finding (in something like Kademlia) records signed by authority you yourself chose to trust instead of asking DNS.

      Then come encryption and dynamic routing and synchronization of published states.

      One can have some kind of Kademlia for discovery of projects too, but on the next level.

      I2P comes close, but it’s more focused on anonymity.

      OK, I’m not sure what I wrote makes sense. These things are easy to grasp somehow, but hard to understand well.

    • doodledup@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      18
      ·
      4 days ago

      Open-source projects are quiet safe on Github. Maybe don’t push illegal code? Seems pretty obvious to me.

  • kingthrillgore@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    3 days ago

    Widevine, BTW, is a Google product that all the browser vendors agree to use. Its the only reason HTML5 has gotten anywhere.

    • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      3 days ago

      Its crazy that we can’t agree on any international rules except the ones that protect IP hoarding

  • x00z@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    This just implies that the Microsoft employee was an OnlyFans subscriber simp.

  • doodledup@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    36
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    The mentioned repositories enable and encourage criminal behavior. And it’s quiet intentional. It’s because of piracy that we have DRM in the first place. The audacity now of pirates to wine about them not getting what they want like the entire world revolves just around them.

    • drspod@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Format-shifting and time-shifting your legally acquired and licensed media is not illegal. If the DRM is preventing someone from doing that then it is within their rights to remove the DRM. Recall that not everyone lives in a country subject to the draconian DMCA law.

      • doodledup@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        3 days ago

        Are you serious right now? You can’t actually believe ordinary people will go out of their way to visit some random Github repository just to remove the DRM for their convenience. I guarantee you that 100% of contributers and users of that repo are doing piracy.

    • HyperfocusSurfer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      3 days ago

      Baseless (and also wrong) assumption that piracy is responsible for by any means significant monetary losses aside, there are other reasons for bypassing that DRM bullshit. Like, off the top of my head:

      • archiving – when you don’t have a local copy of a piece of content, it can be changed or deleted at any time;
      • ability to access stuff on a wider range of devices – I want to be able watch my favorite coomtent creator in full resolution on my phone that has only L3 and quite outdated version of widevine without installing proprietary crapp, so what;
      • bypassing bullshit restrictions – not sure if onlyfans in particular does that, but we have Netflix, for example, that would tell you to fuck off when you’re not watching from home be it VPN or an actually different location when traveling.
      • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 days ago

        They know all that. They want you to be able to only consume content the exact they they publish it.

        That simplifies market analysis, removes the dilemma of supporting or not supporting some other way users want, and ideally selling the same thing a few times.

        • doodledup@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          3 days ago

          They want you to be able to only consume content the exact they they publish it.

          And they have every right to do so. If you like it or not. You don’t own and have not created the protected content. On what basis are you deciding it should not be DRM protected?

          • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            On the basis of having bought it. If they haven’t sold it but made such an impression, then they’ve committed a crime.

            When you are buying a cure against all problems with miniscule text saying it’s just a metaphor, the seller is committing a crime. It’s the same here.

            Morally. Regardless of how courts interpret this right now. That feature that courts and practice officially do not equal morality and thus we can decide differently this time, if we can provide an explanation, is the main advantage of English legal system and those descended from it over others.

      • doodledup@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        Also baseless assumptions.

        Btw, you don’t need to use whatever service you don’t own if you disagree with their practices. DRM is shit. But you’re not in any position to elevate yourself above that. You don’t own the services and you have not contributed in creating the protected content. You have no right to decide anything.

        • HyperfocusSurfer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          Agreed to disagree then. IMO, if a company thinks it’s OK to throw me over the dick hiding behind being afraid of shadows, deny me access to legally obtained content on my devices, walk back on previous deals, and so on, then I have no problem with getting unrestricted access to stuff they decided I don’t technically own. Fuck the fucker, simple as that.

          • doodledup@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            By subscribing you agree to a contract. The company is doing no shitty practice since everything is black and white in the contract. You just don’t like the contract. But the consequence should be to not sign it.

              • doodledup@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 day ago

                The contract states you don’t own it and they can take it away any time. So why are you stupid to sign it? Buy a physical book if you don’t like it. But there is no justification for piracy like “I don’t get exactly what I want so I now decide that I have the moral right to do whatever I want with indefinitely.”

                • nodiratime@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 days ago

                  You are the one who elevates random terms of service above the law just because both parties “agreed” to them, not me.

    • andxz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Your whole series of posts in this thread are seriously unhinged. Are you trying to cosplay a corpo bootlicker or something?

      It’s either that or you’ve been born wealthy enough to never have to think about the money you spend.

      • doodledup@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        You’re working for the same corpos and you’re getting payed. You’re part of the system and you’re profiting off it. We get rid of DRM tomorrow but you get a 20% salary reduction. Would you do it? I think you wouldn’t. So why would they? You guys are pretentious and can’t think past the simplest complexities of an economic system.

        • andxz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          The only jobs I’ve ever had were teaching and nursing, both paid by the country I live in, not some private entity. I don’t even own a car or a TV, nor do I live in the US for that matter.

          Get your head out of your ass and realise there’s more to life than fucking money. I was born poor and will die poor, but I don’t give a shit because I at least know I helped some people along the way.

          Jfc, the bubble some live in. You should be ashamed of yourself, but I guess you’re not even capable of that, are ya?