Topics

So I recently learned about this white paper, in which a New Zealand security analyst takes a look at the implications of how DRM is implemented in Windows Vista. It's a bit long and at times kind of technical, but I really think it's a worthwhile read to see just some of stuff that's going on behind-the-scenes in Vista.

The "short short" summary of the paper is: "The Vista Content Protection specification could very well constitute the longest suicide note in history." And after reading through it, it really seems like Microsoft is trying to cripple your PC. All just so you can play HD movies on it. The worst part is that since Microsoft's policies impact hardware developers, everyone will end up feeling the effects of this. Really, all I can suggest is to at least skim through the paper and see some of the things he's talking about.

But I think the bigger story is that the arrival of HD media in general is just plain broken.

First, there's the issue of HDCP. Any device transmitting, receiving, or passing an HD signal through it must be compatible with HDCP encryption in order for you to actually see HD on your TV. The practical side of this is that pretty much everyone sitting here today - including those that may have already purchased "HD capable" devices - will have to upgrade to equipment that's compliant with HDCP.

The second part of this is AACS, which allows "compromised" HD devices to be put on a blacklist and stop working. So let's say some hacker uses the cryptographic keys from your model DVD player to make his own black-market player, or the company that made your player doesn't renew their AACS license, or the AACS licenser decides that the company that made your player "isn't doing enough" to protect HD content. That's right, for reasons totally beyond your control, your HD equipment could one day just suddenly stop working.

And of course the alleged purpose for all of this - to stop piracy - won't work, and in the end the honest customer is burdened with the additional cost of all of this "technology" that really does nothing. This article suggests a darker motive behind DRM, and I can't say that I disagree.

I'm really troubled by all of this. I'm prepared to move to Linux, but I don't really see Vista flopping. The majority of home users will end up using it as they upgrade their PCs (and Microsoft can force the issue by ending support for XP), so I don't see software developers and hardware manufacturers abandoning the platform. And as the US moves to HD within the next 10 years or so, sooner or later I'll be forced to purchase one of these DRM-hobbled devices. The consumer is being forced to support a technology that nobody wants and that doesn't work anyway. Really, what's a person to do? Thoughts anyone?

So, I was at an art fair yesterday. I thought there was a lot of good stuff, but I was a little surprised by the prices. There wasn't a painting under $1000, and there was quite a bit of stuff that was over $10,000. One piece that I really liked was over $13,000.

Then I stepped into a booth with some fantastic photographic stills, and his most expensive piece was $950 (most were between $400-$600). As I thought about it, it seemed to me that the creative process that he went through was no less impressive than that of a painter (or sculptor, metalworker, etc.), and I thought his photos were just as visually gripping and stimulating as any painting. I found it hard to justify paying 3-10 times more for something that I thought had equal artistic value.

I guess my thinking was, for a medium that seems to carry the stigma of being "inaccessible", or that people feel they "can't understand," it seems like pricing paintings in this price range just reinforces that notion. And for a profession that carries the "starving artist" stereotype (which I realize is just a stereotype), at those prices, I can't imagine they were in any hurry to sell their work.

Certainly I appreciate and recognize the hard-learned skill, natural talent, creative vision, and "practice, practice, practice" behind the work. But like any other skill/talent/profession, how much is it worth over the cost of raw materials?

I don't know, am I out of touch with the art world? Am I just a cheap bastard (which I've certainly been accused of in the past)? Was I just at the "wrong" art fair? I'm curious as to what other people think - assuming that anyone else cares! 

Hello, everyone! I've been lingering on these forums for a while, but I've just now finally summoned up the nerve to post.

I've been working on this sprite for a while, and have reached the point where I need some help.

(x1) (x3)

I'm actually quite happy with this except for the head. It's a lot better than when I first started, but I can't seem get the face and hair to look ... attractive. The only difference between the two versions is her bangs. I've been fiddling with her hair and various facial features for a while, but I can't seem to make much of an improvement. Any suggestions and/or paintovers would be greatly appreciated! (In case it's not obvious, she's supposed to be wearing pigtails. The 2nd one is behind her head pointing "into" the screen.)

Of course, any other suggestions are also welcome. You can check out my "references" at http://www.flickr.com/photos/kozyndan/141420977/ and http://www.cosmates.jp/shop/product_info/pid-1560.html.

Thanks!