Hacker News Reader

Comment by charcircuit | Hacker News Reader

[flagged]

Corporations have broken the trust of paying customers which is why they are not trusted. Corporations were given chances after chances to be responsible and not unethically prevent consumption of content after being paid, but many corporations repeatedly violated that trust (and continue to do so, as I write this) and have never acted in good faith.

I've been following your posts over the past few days, and your philosophy has never been clearer than it is here. You just straight up hate the idea of users having the upper hand over corporations.

>You just straight up hate the idea of users having the upper hand over corporations.

Corporations are not the only ones who want their content protected or their services to be secured against cheaters or spammers. Corporations are the ones most capable to invest into improving security. For example look at VRChat avatar artists vs avatar stealers. My philosophy is that if an artist wants to have their avatar secured from being stolen that it is right for the avatars to be protected from users being able to copy them. It is less that I hate users having the upper hand against these artists, but that I would like the artist's desires to be respected. From the trusted computed standpoint I want indie developers to have a chance in creating things without having to invest as much time and money into experince. If you can protect you scoreboard's integrity by trusted computing then the time you have to spend removing hacked scores or detecting people with cheats or licensing an anticheat goes away. It shifts the responsibility from the developer to the platform.

If you've never had something you've made violated by users and have been unable to stop them you may not be able to empathize with people in those situation wishing for a solution to exist.

So-called "intellectual property" is not property. It cannot be stolen unless someone manages to deprive you of it. You do not own ideas, even ones you come up with yourself - you are merely given a temporary monopoly to encourage you to create more ideas. Or at least that was the deal. A deal that has been broken over and over again by extending the supposedly temporary monopoly to be longer than anyones lifetime. It has been broken by addition of technical means to further restrict the content. It has been broken by content not even entering the commons by the time the copyright expires because it has been lost or depends on onliine components which no longer exist.

>So-called "intellectual property" is not property. It cannot be stolen unless someone manages to deprive you of it.

There are people do not want others to use the avatars they made. This doesn't require the concept of IP or require some definition of stealing. They want their work to be protected and are looking to platforms to protect it.

As an indie dev, the so called "trusted" environment is an obstacle to product distribution, is increasing friction and actively reducing revenue, I don't want any of that.

I would recommend not using it at first. If things start to get problematic you can start requiring a trusted environment for some things. For example you could save a user's highscore even if they are on an untrusted device, but it just won't show up on a global leaderboard.

And yet somehow, the illegal copy is the one you can trust will always work. Maybe there's a lesson to be learned for the DRM producers here.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com