Re: [mmox] mmox Digest, Vol 1, Issue 111

Dan Olivares <dcolivares@gmail.com> Mon, 23 February 2009 17:09 UTC

Return-Path: <dcolivares@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mmox@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmox@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 432F83A698F for <mmox@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 09:09:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.766
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.766 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.833, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4jigSrKfhc+V for <mmox@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 09:09:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-fx0-f167.google.com (mail-fx0-f167.google.com [209.85.220.167]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D65173A6874 for <mmox@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 09:09:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by fxm11 with SMTP id 11so1972966fxm.13 for <mmox@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 09:09:49 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=8hfz/LqX1+uWecKo5y6GFg8zuZ+kQB2pD5+/vr37oSI=; b=bQhirNkx3dEOv3XQXrb90tT18tBmY97OfU9Wr8h3d6OL8+R/bemztT63699qGX2iTi q91baU+gu7+3XljXVttSMAnfoQ9zws+I119hbZmgCYdw7Nv3DzVbJdlrSq0AI1Gn5teQ usNhGMcIjTv+niRc/1w5nqqUR/AKgAfh/lI3I=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=jp2AV1nFVKQCYZpBKELqBqiNtumec7M5Etl82YwuC9cRArNfOakg8e3AsRa9xnekNL 0M+ynJZWRykyYI1GTNxorxgK4sVenTotJ5jpLiNe2cQSjg0wJCvLw5KrN1xmqLcGLWy+ 6yfAAOl1UdhY+Z3yanuMwrIL1sJ/735plMSBs=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.103.214.8 with SMTP id r8mr3495221muq.6.1235408988958; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 09:09:48 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20090223.113041.5499.0@webmail09.vgs.untd.com>
References: <20090223.113041.5499.0@webmail09.vgs.untd.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 12:09:48 -0500
Message-ID: <a768bcd90902230909m27130727q75de3dbdbf5c8d9c@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dan Olivares <dcolivares@gmail.com>
To: "dyerbrookme@juno.com" <dyerbrookme@juno.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: mmox@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mmox] mmox Digest, Vol 1, Issue 111
X-BeenThere: mmox@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Massively Multi-participant Online Games and Applications <mmox.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmox>, <mailto:mmox-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mmox>
List-Post: <mailto:mmox@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mmox-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmox>, <mailto:mmox-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 17:09:33 -0000

This letter is an example of a False Dilemma logical
fallacy.(http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/false-dilemma.html)
"Either there must be a mandate to protect content, or nobody will
protect content", when in fact, people will protect content based on
their business model, not by some arbitrary mandate.  Some will
require contracts for interoperability that state that content
protection metadata must be honored.

Bringing up OpenSim with regards to this is also purely a 'Poisioning
of the Well' logical fallacy.  "OpenSimulator is Lennist, therefore
it's wrong" (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/poisoning-the-well.html)

Best Regards

Dan


On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 11:30 AM, dyerbrookme@juno.com
<dyerbrookme@juno.com> wrote:
> <For someone talking about choice so much you seem very preconcerned
> with mandating what choices VW providers make. Nothing wrong with
> putting a field in the asset metadata for permissions stuff, but it
> definitely should NOT be a mandatory part of the standard.
>
> It's absolutely about choice. Stripping DRM out as a mandate and removing the mandate is not choice, but a forced march, under the guise that the mandate would remove choice. In fact, the receiving grid has the choice not to hook up to such grids that have these requirements and it can also defeat them, and then signal to those who care that it is not trustworthy; that should be at the heart of what trustworthy means. Why is the onus only on the sending grid? Collective security isn't about one wild grid getting to defeat the business requirements of all the others under the false flag of choice, it's about collective security; the wild grid can keep its wild DRM-less regime on its own server with its own sandboxers. OpenSim says the opposite, make a silo of permissions on one server as a module, thereby negating commerce as a premise to the architecture.
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Switch to the thrill of high speed internet for $19.95/mo with AT&T
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/BLSrjpTEs5PjpChbas9zvDZy3dlMmvxUDX7C8QybUtHYlw74vEVquQpBJcP/
> _______________________________________________
> mmox mailing list
> mmox@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmox
>