Lunduke interviews w3c.

File: 1499804361084.jpg (4KB, 269x211px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 269x211px

>EME is an API for DRM but you don't have to use it for DRM
hmmmm......

>>61379153
that was an actually compelling interview about a controversial topic.

>>61380626
it might have been more compelling if the w3c guy believed what he was saying

>>61380626
>>61380767
but yes bryan handled this very well

>>61379153
tldr?

install tumbleweed now

>>61382967

tl;dr: man on right makes poor not very well thought out statements while SUSEman himself makes faces at him but stays friendly

longer tl;dr
>EME is a web standard for implementing DRM, but it doesn't have to be used for DRM!
>But it's for encrypted web content, it couldn't really be used for anything else. It's /technically/ an ambiguous standard...

>Lunduke repeatedly asks why w3c does not amend EME to at least include an exception for security researchers, as breaking DRM of any sort and for any reason is illegal in the USA
>w3c man repeatedly makes the argument "but we won't sue anyone!"
>Lunduke rightfully makes the point that, while he might be a nice guy, not everyone will be a nice guy forever and all security researchers within the US shouldn't be "technically incriminated"
>This happens multiple times
>w3c man is either too intelligent to understand or he's dodging it on purpose

I stopped about halfway through when I was actually getting annoyed at how many times bryan had to state something for w3c man to miss the point and talk about how they "discourage that usage" (referring to using it as a tool to technically incriminate people) or they "would never pursue charges" and never answering why they won't put that in writing as far as I watched

he dodges an insinuation of monetary motivation (microsoft and google among others wrote the spec)

w3c man makes one good point that plugins are a major point of security failure, so writing a spec to handle DRM so plugins no longer have to will ensure browser makers can secure their browsers

>>61383607
there is also probably more to this because i only watched halfway

for all i know w3c man really made some great points in the second half and the first just made him look bad

File: 1498893304635.jpg (85KB, 633x438px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 633x438px

why doesn't bryan post here?

>>61383811
there was a post about what /g/ thinks about him and someone with the name "not bryan wink wink" posted "i think he's very handsome" or something
hmm...

>>61382981
s-shut up bryan. you had nothing to do with me trying it out on a server.

File: lundsome.jpg (9KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 200x200px

>>61383821
He really is handsome. Just look at him. We should put him on the sticky.

>>61383607
Also one interesting point was that EME should not allow a big variety of use such as Flash or full JS, but only video content?
I wonder how much it's true and what can it actually do.

File: serveimage.jpg (36KB, 424x318px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 424x318px

>>61384496
his old porn moustache was perfect

>>61386481
C-Could it be that he is our /g/uy ?