Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Digg.com Attempts To Suppress HD-DVD Revolt

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the toothpaste-back-in-the-tube dept.

Censorship 1142

fieryprophet writes "An astonishing number of stories related to HD-DVD encryption keys have gone missing in action from digg.com, in many cases along with the account of the diggers who submitted them. Diggers are in open revolt against the moderators and are retaliating in clever and inventive ways. At one point, the entire front page comprised only stories that in one way or another were related to the hex number. Digg users quickly pointed to the HD DVD sponsorship of Diggnation, the Digg podcast show. Search digg for HD-DVD song lyrics, coffee mugs, shirts, and more for a small taste of the rebellion." Search Google for a broader picture; at this writing, about 283,000 pages contain the number with hyphens, and just under 10,000 without hyphens. There's a song. Several domain names including variations of the number have been reserved. Update: 05/02 05:44 GMT by J : New blog post from Kevin Rose of Digg to its users: "We hear you."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I'd like to say... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18951023)

If you're one of the endless little "Slashdot is dead, go to digg" trolls that reply to stories every now & again, I (and the rest of slashdot) would like to say: "Fuck You".

Your wonderful little Digg isn't looking so wonderful now - is it?

In comparison to Digg's censorship, slashdot has the hex key as a story tag. [slashdot.org]

Re:I'd like to say... (4, Interesting)

Marcion (876801) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951091)

All credit to the song, its quite good actually, I am gonna set it as my ringtone I think.

Who'd have thought, they would use all that Web 2.0 wisdom of the crowds stuff to hide the fact they censor everything.

kdawson, and the old Taco himself, we salute you.

P.S. Digg This (1)

Marcion (876801) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951123)

I do not have an account there and have no idea how it works, but those of you who pee in both ponds, Digg this thread :-)

Re:I'd like to say... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18951125)

You little bitch. You probably think you're real smart for staying at slashdot. Good job asshole. You and along with everyone else here shares your same damn opinion. Way to be a real rebel, you motherfucker. You know what, fuck you, fuck digg, fuck slashdot, fuck web2.0 bullshit, fuck the damn internet. I'm sick of little fucks like you polluting the internet with all this shit. Take me back to the fucking troll days of usenet for christ sakes. GET THE FUCK OUT. WHEN CAN WE GET SOME REAL NEWS SLASHDOT? NOT THIS PSEUDONEWS ANTI-DIGG ANTI-WEB3919.0 ASSHOLE SHIT. GIVE ME SOME REAL NEWS

Re:I'd like to say... (5, Funny)

Marcion (876801) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951319)

Hello, I can fix it for you. At the back of the computer, there is a socket called the Ethernet socket, pull the wire out and go sit it a dark room. Everything will be fine.

Re:I'd like to say... (3, Insightful)

The Woodworker (723841) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951289)

Actually, I was on Digg over a year ago and it was a great tech news site. It's popularity has now killed it, with spammers submitting so many stories and comments that I don't pay much attention any more. Once a site reaches a critical mass, it's only good for advertising as everyone tries to game the system for their financial benefit. I've been coming to slashdot since 97, and the same is true. Same with Google search results. No where near as good as they used to be.

Was this duped on purpose? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18951031)

I don't think Slashdot editors are that clever.

09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0

Was this duped on purpose? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18951085)

I don't think Anonymous Cowards are that clever.

09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0

Re:Was this duped on purpose? (5, Insightful)

leonbev (111395) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951131)

It's only a partial dupe... The first story was about the HD DVD key getting censored on certain sites, and the second story was about Digg's front page getting trashed because they were one of the sites who was censoring it.

Slashdot deserves a big thumbs-up from the tech community for NOT being one of those sites!

Re:Was this duped on purpose? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18951167)

The first article was written by a guy complaining he was censored on Digg, and this one is about censorship on Digg. Sure seems like a dupe to me.

Re:Was this duped on purpose? (5, Informative)

jamie (78724) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951269)

Sure seems like a dupe to me.

It's not.

Re:Was this duped on purpose? (3, Funny)

Marcion (876801) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951287)

Well it is about time, they went out of their way to say how much greater they were than Slashdot, and all the kids drank Kool-Aid. Now our team gets a goal :-)

Yes I am English, and everything becomes a football analogy, your problem is?

Can you hear the Diggities sing
noooooooooo, noooooooooooo
Can you hear the Diggities sing
I CAN'T HEAR A 09 F9 11 THING!!!!!

So..... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18951033)

I got a 404 error the first time I checked this.

How Ironic.

Re:So..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18951391)

Digg got Dugg

Wow (2)

MisterCookie (991581) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951041)

It really has gone out of control on digg. Dozens of useful stories have just got knocked off the front page to make way for more crap on this key. I'm under the impression that the average digg user is a 12 year old who tries to stick it to "the man" by posting a number under complete anonymity.

Credibility (5, Insightful)

airencracken (993443) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951053)

Digg took a big hit to their credibility today. They underestimated the outrage caused by the banning of users and removal of stories. Perhaps they'll learn that the site is made by the users. Without diggers, there is no digg.

Re:Credibility (-1, Troll)

vanyel (28049) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951189)

With users like those idiots, there won't be a Digg after they're sued into oblivion.

Re:Credibility (2, Insightful)

at_slashdot (674436) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951215)

People posted the number on slashdot too. You can't ban a number.

Re:Credibility (2, Insightful)

cbreaker (561297) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951229)

Digg has always been a web site that contains all user-submit data - links, posts, etc. It would be really hard for someone to build a credible case against them for the content on that site, especially if they show that they did indeed make an effort to stop it - which is WHY it's become a game for those kids over there.

Re:Credibility (5, Insightful)

vanyel (28049) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951423)

Does Digg have corporate deep pockets willing to take the chance? They're in a no-win situation: risk being destroyed legally and/or financially, or be destroyed by idiots who don't have to make essentially life or death decisions about their creation. Idiots who would rather destroy and vandalize than do something productive like spread the number around in the less conspicuous nooks and crannies of the internet where it has a chance to get embedded in the depths of search engine caches and archives before it can be discovered and taken down. Or for that matter, on remote web sites out of reach of US et al lawyers.

As though the number actually mattered anyhow. The only people who will use it don't need it posted.

Re:Credibility (2, Funny)

dunezone (899268) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951193)

I love Digg, I love Slashdot, I love Reddit. But you're right, today they lost alot of credibility. I've had my own blog on the front of Digg, I wrote it simply because I enjoy being on Digg. Unfortunately, over the past few months we started to notice that certain stories were being pulled from the front page or not even allowed on the front page. We complained and commented on the accounts but nothing ever came about it. Today though, Digg couldn't get away with what they did and their paying for the mistake right now. I made this in response: http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/1087/pic4gp6.jp g [imageshack.us]

Re:Credibility (5, Insightful)

Marcion (876801) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951201)

"Our goal is always to maintain a purely democratic system for the submission and sharing of information" ... " the posting of the encryption key infringes their intellectual property rights. In order to respect these rights" ... "we have removed postings of the key that have been brought to our attention." - Digg

'"intellectual property" - The distorting and confusing term did not arise by accident. Companies that gain from the confusion promoted it... eject the narrow perspectives and simplistic picture the term "intellectual property" suggests. Consider each of these issues separately, in its fullness, and you have a chance of considering them well.' -- RMS

Re:Credibility (1)

at_slashdot (674436) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951253)

Very good quote, thanks. What exactly is the "intellectual property" here? Has the number been copyrighted?

Re:Credibility (1)

Marcion (876801) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951377)

The MPAA were not claiming any, they were claiming a circumvention of a protection measure under the DMCA, which is something else altogether. The Digg people are idiots, this number is going to be on 100,000 websites by tomorrow. The MPAA will give up but Digg will still look like weeds.

Re:Credibility (1)

omeomi (675045) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951409)

Very good quote, thanks. What exactly is the "intellectual property" here? Has the number been copyrighted?

I am in no way supporting the censorship of this key, but they actually could technically get into legal trouble over it being on their site. The DMCA outlaws the distribution of information that allows others to crack encryption algorithms. This is the same crap that happened with DeCSS, and university professors have actually gotten into legal problems over papers on encryption algorithms because of it.

All of these instances are examples of how the DMCA infringes on the guaranteed right to free speech in America. We're not talking about profanity. We're not talking about death threats. This is intelligent, academic discourse that is being trampled by a provision of a law that forces publishers of websites and other media to become censors for the government.

Re:Credibility (1)

AoT (107216) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951205)

Yeah, funny how people get that much more outraged at censorship when they're the ones being censored. Really, it's about time something like this came along to test sites like digg. They'll be at a point soon where they have pretty much no choice but to let the numbers stay up, lest the fall into the **AA business model of attack the customers.

Re:Credibility (1)

ralphthemagician (1096045) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951235)

What credibility? Since when was Digg ever credible? Just look at it. Most of the users are between the ages of 14 and 16. They spend their days on YTMND and their nights on 4chan. Digg is their CNN. Really, this is exactly how I'd expect the Digg userbase to respond. Everyone who's digging and posting the code doesn't even know what it means, or how to use it. Some people can't even copy and paste it right. Really, they are just trying to cause some trouble.

Re:Credibility (5, Funny)

DavidLeblond (267211) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951267)

Raise your hand if you are surprised.

Digg is a website that is only as good as the users that contribute to it. Its user base is a bunch of people that... well... lets face it, watch Diggnation.

I rest my case.

Re:Credibility (4, Insightful)

ZachPruckowski (918562) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951273)

This just proves that the journey is as important as the destination. Both digg and slashdot will ultimately have to remove most of the instances of the number eventually, but digg is doing it in secret. Ultimately, slashdot will get a DMCA notice, and can chose whether or not to fight it. If they do what they did last time [slashdot.org] , then they'll come out as heroes. If the comments disappear in the dead of night and people notice, they'll get attacked.

Re:Credibility (4, Informative)

russotto (537200) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951395)

If Slashdot gets a DMCA section 512 notice, they can probably safely trash it. The number isn't copyrightable; it's not a creative work. More likely they'll get a C&D accusing them of violating DMCA 1201 (17 USC 1201(a)(2) and 17 USC 1201(b)(1) ). Then it's the 2600 case all over again -- and DVDCCA won that one.

Ah, how timely (5, Insightful)

metlin (258108) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951059)

The fortune cookie at the bottom of the page reads -

"Anyone attempting to generate random numbers by deterministic means is, of course, living in a state of sin." -- John Von Neumann

Indeed.

Re:Ah, how timely (5, Informative)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951313)

Figures. The funniest part of that quote is missing! Before Von Neumann uttered that sentence, he first stated that "The generation of random numbers is far too important to leave to chance." :-P

Re:Ah, how timely (2, Insightful)

Doctor Crumb (737936) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951405)

Lies! I just wrote a random number generator, and it works wonderfully!

Here's the source code:


my @seeds = (
        -1, 239, 7, -8, 0x93, 0x6a, 217, 81, 206, 55, 76, 187, 89, 76, 126, 182
);

# mutate the seed in some manner to get random hex output.
my @results;
foreach my $seed (@seeds)
{
        my $result = ($seed + 10) % 256;
        push @results, $result;
}
foreach my $result (@results) {
        printf("%0x:", $result);
}

Overreaction (1)

elysiuan (762931) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951069)

Complete overreaction by the Digg administrators. Somebody saw this happening, looked at their complimentary HD-DVD Coalition coffee cup, and did something stupid.

Hopefully they will use this as an object lesson in how trying to silence problems by emulating Minitrue only leads to drama and madness.

Say what you will about Slashdot, but /. makes many other popular 'web2.0' content sites look just like a flash in the pan. Taco & co. at least know when not to do something.

Toothpaste.. (5, Funny)

craznar (710808) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951071)

The harder you sqeeze, the more comes out.

MPAA Lesson of the day.

00110000001110010100011000111001001100010011000100 11000000110010001110010100010000110111001101000100 01010011001100110101010000100100010000111000001101 00001100010011010100110110010000110011010100110110 00110011001101010011011000111000001110000100001100 11000000100000

Re:Toothpaste.. (1)

craznar (710808) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951109)

Not squeezing hard enough it seems, the u didn't come out.

That should of course be squeeze...

Re:Toothpaste.. (5, Funny)

airencracken (993443) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951143)

Governor Tarkin: Princess Leia, before your execution, you will join me at a ceremony that will make this battle station operational. No star system will dare oppose the Emperor now. Princess Leia: The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.

Re:Toothpaste.. (1)

Jonavin (71006) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951263)

I was just thinking there must be some way to form the bits into a picture somehow... oh wait, I think I see an elephant.

Kevin Rose is such a bitch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18951077)

He persists on using the mantra of "LOL POWER TO TEH PEOPLE!" yet he blatantly censors his diggers.

It's funny (0, Redundant)

gcnaddict (841664) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951083)

Laugh. [longhornlive.net]

Just so you know (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18951087)

09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0

Re:Just so you know (5, Funny)

dynamo (6127) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951217)

Thank you. Someone mod that up so I can find it if I ever need it later.

Poor Digg (1)

had3l (814482) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951097)

I've never seen anything like this before, it's probably unprecedented. (I know I've been digging HD-DVD stories all day long)

I wonder if it's the end of Digg...

Frickin' Hilarious (2, Funny)

Lije Baley (88936) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951099)

This is the funniest thing I've seen since reading the "Slashdot Trolling Phenomena" entry in Wikipedia.

Re:Frickin' Hilarious (5, Funny)

Old Wolf (56093) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951249)

This is the funniest thing I've seen since reading the "Slashdot Trolling Phenomena" entry in Wikipedia.

That page has now been removed (it redirects to Slashdot). But I did learn something useful - prime-number user IDs are considered valuable by some. Funnily enough, I checked mine and it is prime. All I have to do now is sit back and wait for my plan to come to fruition.

1. Discover your user ID is prime
2. ???
3. Profit!

Digg management are full of hypocrites (5, Interesting)

cioxx (456323) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951103)

Since its inception Digg had a community-driven submission and voting process which did not supress free speech. I've seen endless stories and links to torrent sites like piratebay, demonoid, bitme, et al. and Digg management turned a blind eye on directing users to places of "copyright infringement"

Today it's different for some reason. One of the managers posted a justification on the official blog [digg.com] :

Whether you agree or disagree with the policies of the intellectual property holders and consortiums, in order for Digg to survive, it must abide by the law. Diggs Terms of Use, and the terms of use of most popular sites, are required by law to include policies against the infringement of intellectual property.


Funny stuff.

Re:Digg management are full of hypocrites (1)

Wesley Felter (138342) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951239)

Apparently at Digg, abiding by the law means taking the law into your own hands and then some.

Re:Digg management are full of hypocrites (1)

1010110010 (1002553) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951247)

It's even funnier when you take into account that Jay Adelson also runs revision3.com, which produces the "Diggnation" show, which is in turn sponsored by the HD-DVD coalition.

This saddens me (1)

00squirrel (772984) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951105)

This is surprising and saddening that Digg would do this. Digg has become my favorite web site--it replaced /. a while back, sorry--and this makes me really lose respect for the Digg crew.

Re:This saddens me (4, Funny)

Tibor the Hun (143056) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951321)

we slashdotters are honored by your honesty, and we hope you documented your feelings in your blog.

Re:This saddens me (1)

rinkjustice (24156) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951381)

Now how about you come back to Slashdot and forget about Digg. We'll forgive you, honest. It just can't be the same as it was before.

I've always (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18951113)

wanted an article about an article

You can't ban a number. Period. (4, Insightful)

at_slashdot (674436) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951115)

Title says all ;-)

Before this gets out of hand again... (-1, Flamebait)

zaren (204877) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951117)

This is NOT censorship.

Censorship is a government telling someone what they cannot read, hear, see, or think.

What this IS (IMHO) is very bad management decisions.

Digg is a privately owned entity, which does not answer to a government, and - even though you'd like it to - doesn't answer to its users. It answers to the people that pay to keep it running.

Apparently, the people that keep it running didn't want HD DVD keys posted on the site. So Digg honored their wishes.

And they did it poorly.

Only time will tell how poorly, and how it will affect their user base.

Re:Before this gets out of hand again... (5, Insightful)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951197)

Excuse me.

The MPAA (or whoever) is telling Digg to take down those stories.

They have the authority to do this thanks to the DMCA.

The DMCA is a law enacted by who? That's right, the government of the United States of America.

So who is threatening the people who run Digg with jail time? That's right, the United States of America.

How is that not censorship?

Re:Before this gets out of hand again... (1)

SishGupta (750430) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951225)

It is censorship when a person tries to stop another from saying or doing something.
It doesn't necessarily have to do with the gov't or with law.
The leader of a community can censor its members.

I have to disagree with you when you said digg doesn't answer to its users.
When a site is user driven such as it is to the point that we call it a community based site, there is an extent to where digg MUST answer to its users, but of course within reason. Should digg fail to do so, which I don't totally feel that they have (thought they did drop a very large ball), the community is neglected and there would be a lack of genuine participation.

WRONG! (3, Insightful)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951257)

This is NOT censorship.

Incorrect. Censorship is when someone censors [reference.com] you.

Censorship is a government telling someone what they cannot read, hear, see, or think.

Wrong. I can censor what my kids watch on TV, my work can censor my internet access, etc.

What you're thinking of is the first amendment.

Re:Before this gets out of hand again... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18951265)

This is NOT censorship.

Censorship is a government telling someone what they cannot read, hear, see, or think


That's just plain wrong. Censorship, as defined by Merriam-Webster, is:

"a : the institution, system, or practice of censoring b : the actions or practices of censors; especially : censorial control exercised repressively"

What part of that qualifies only governments to "censor"?

Re:Before this gets out of hand again... (1)

fabs64 (657132) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951277)

Digg is paid for (in part) by ads, which rely on hits from users.
I'm not sure which definition of the word 'censorship' says that it only applies to the government, but it's wrong. While diggs censorship is legal, that doesn't make it NOT censorship.

Re:Before this gets out of hand again... (4, Informative)

Nasarius (593729) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951309)

Must we go through this every single time? From M-W:

censor
to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable <censor the news>; also : to suppress or delete as objectionable <censor out indecent passages>
If you can find me a single definition of "censor" as a verb that refers exclusively to the government, I'd be shocked. By virtue of the US Constitution, such acts are typically only illegal when done by the government. It is no less "censorship".

I believe it all started with Google... (1)

cyclocommuter (762131) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951339)

... censoring or asking one guy to cease and desist posting the code in his Google Notepad this morning. This story was posted on digg and it went downhill (for digg) from there. From around 10 PM EST up to the present 12 AM, all the digg stories on their tech section are about the hex codes. The question is will this be the start of digg's downfall? They have always prided themselves with giving "power to their users"...

Re:Before this gets out of hand again... (5, Informative)

NorthwestWolf (941862) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951341)

"Censorship is a government telling someone what they cannot read, hear, see, or think."

You might want to try that one again chief, the act of censorship isn't only carried out by governments. By your logic media private outlets couldn't censor information.

See the following to get a fucking clue:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship [wikipedia.org]

n. censor 1. A person authorized to examine books, films, or other material and to remove or suppress what is considered morally, politically, or otherwise objectionable.

tr.v. censored, censoring, censors
To examine and expurgate.

Re:Before this gets out of hand again... (1)

Tibor the Hun (143056) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951355)

what do you mean it's a privately owned entity, and as such does not answer to the government?

when a judge sends you a letter (not that she did, in this case) you'd best answer it.

Re:Before this gets out of hand again... (1)

Brian Cohen (1027542) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951429)

It still is censorship in a way though. I would consider it tantamount to a state government banning evolution from public schools due to pressure from an interest group. Or the Boy Scouts banning gays and atheists from participating because of monetary support of the Mormon church.

Digg is a piece of shit (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18951119)

Notwithstanding the fact that most articles are either innacurate or stupid, they will IP ban anyone who says anything bad about their site. Digg is one step up from "myspace"

Also, you can get a perm ban from digg if you use the star of david as your "digg icon"... no kidding!

Re:Digg is a piece of shit (1)

ralphthemagician (1096045) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951411)

You also get IP banned apparently when you leave a comment that says, "lol, niggers" but, "lol, naggers" is okay.

Honestly curious... (5, Interesting)

ParadoxDruid (602583) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951127)

Digg actually posted a reply to the community on their blog here [digg.com] .

What I'm honestly curious about is this: Is this numeric string code copyrighted? Where is the copyright filed, if so? Or is it a trade secret? Do trade secrets need to be filed or declared somehow? Is a trade secret intellectual property that must be removed when a theatening (maybe DMCA) notice is sent?

I'm nowhere near understanding the complexities of the current intellectual property legal codes in the USA, let alone how they actually apply in this situation. All I see is hysteria.

Re:Honestly curious... (2, Interesting)

endx7 (706884) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951349)

The number key can be used to circumvent the HD DVD copyright protection mechanism (AACS)... This particular key sounds especially important.

The DMCA has clauses to protect DRM in addition to adding provisions for protection of copyright (as well as outlining common carrier liability).

From the wikipedia article about DRM:

Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is an extension to United States copyright law passed unanimously on May 14, 1998, which criminalizes the production and dissemination of technology that allows users to circumvent technical copy-restriction methods, rendering all forms of DRM-stripping and circumvention software illegal, as well as some aspects of research and reverse engineering of existing systems. On 22 May 2001, the European Union passed the EU Copyright Directive, an implementation of the 1996 WIPO Copyright Treaty that addressed many of the same issues as the DMCA.

Re:Honestly curious... (2, Informative)

SPYvSPY (166790) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951357)

The string allows one to circumvent copy protection measures. Under the DMCA, publishing such information is a thought crime punishable by scrotal piercing.

Re:Honestly curious... (1)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951387)

I'm not quite sure about whether the hex string is copyrighted, though many have pointed out that you can't copyright a random sequence. As far as I know, the hex string is random, and therefore not copyrighteable. It also can't be taken down due to trade secret reasons, because trade secrets have no defense in law. If you find a trade secret through legal means (and the forum crack seemed to be done entirely with legal means), it's yours.

What I can tell though is that the AACS LA group is pretty keen on putting the genie back in the bottle. I'm guessing that as the doom9 forumgoers pointed out, they won't revoke the entire XBox HD-DVD player line. The only alternative they have is to ban the number from the internet - or they're going to have to just live with the fact that a large fraction of the current HD-DVD players are basically DRM-free. Maybe I should invest in one now. :)

Wikipedia (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18951129)

Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] has chosen to speedy-delete the article and all similarly titled articles based on the hexadecimal number. I found the deletion review [wikipedia.org] at this link. It seems like the only way left to get the article undeleted is to present good arguments there. I, for my part, have been blocked by another admin for posting my undelete comment. It looks like censorship is in season.

Re:Wikipedia (5, Funny)

micksam7 (1026240) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951301)

The key has also snuck into other places [wikipedia.org] on wikipedia as well. :)

Quick to rise.... (5, Funny)

nobodyman (90587) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951147)

And quick to fall. I cannot believe how swift and concerted this response is. I bet the digg admins are kinda wishing they had, oh I dunno.... EDITORS?

Digg meltdown (5, Insightful)

ISurfTooMuch (1010305) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951151)

I've been watching this develop tonight, and Digg has gone into meltdown, not so much in the technical sense but in the sense that the user base is in open revolt, posting stories containing the code and commenting on events over...and...over...and over. As quickly as one article is removed, two more appear, and the tone of them is getting angrier and angrier by the hour.

Just my opinion, but I don't see how Digg can come out of this with any credibility left. Was this ever about the DMCA? Perhaps in the beginning, but it's turned into a battle of wills between the Digg admins and its user base, and, even if the admins could somehow manage to magically obliterate every article on this subject, they're going to have a hard time explaining themselves to the user base, who are, by and large, mad as hell.

And to those who are, indeed, mad as hell, consider what you will do after this incident is over. Kevin and the other admins may indeed fear a lawsuit if they don't take these articles down. Is that wrong, or is the law that allows this possibility the thing that is wrong? It's easy to sit there and paste line after line of numbers, but what would you do in the face of a lawsuit, even if it it's a ridiculous lawsuit supported by a law crafted just for this kind of abuse? You're taking action now, but will you get organized to push for real change tomorrow, the day after, and the day after that?

When will people realise... (3, Insightful)

smegged (1067080) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951173)

... Oppression of an idea, thought or belief is the best way to get the news spread (see religion). It is the overcommercialisation of an idea which causes it to fade from popularity (see modern day rock music). The best thing that the music industry, or indeed the movie industry could do to stamp out piracy is to ignore it and release a superior product (I am more than willing to pay for a high quality product, provided I can do with it whatever I wish). Currently DRMed digital music and video is an inferior product at a higher price than what "the pirates" are producing, which is why the MAFIAA continue to lose market share to the Coallition of Regular Annonymous Pirates (CRAP).

Free Speech "Snowcrash" (2, Funny)

Foktip (736679) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951179)

Its like digg imploded from too much freedom... into a continuous fuzz of meaningless crap (basically like april fools day on the uncyclopedia.org). I CANT WAIT to see the next episode of diggnation!!!

Significance of the Date? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18951181)

It strikes me as odd that this key was discovered a month or two ago but only today surfaces like this.

Today. May 1st.

May Day [wikipedia.org] .

Kevin, Alex, They Coulda Been Web 2.0 Folk Heroes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18951183)

If they stood up. Now who will watch their backs -the MPAA? Don't bet on it.

Shameful...

Beyond the hex (4, Interesting)

loconet (415875) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951191)

As I said numerous times,

People don't seem to understand that this goes beyond a silly little hex key. The key has been out for months. A new one will come and it will also be broken. This is not about that. This is about consumers finally standing up against the bullshit being fed to them by media giants. They crossed the line today when they forced digg to censor user generated content, not only articles but also comments and somewhat related content.

As a consumer i am sick and tired of getting fabricated excuses as to why i can't play what I've bought wherever the hell i want. NO, i don't care if you keep making up the story that DRM is to protect yourself from piracy. I don't buy it. DRM will be broken no matter what. DRM is there to ensure your revenue stream by controlling where I can play the content. Now you go and censor my news source giving a bullshit excuse that a randomly generated hex number is some how your IP? You install rootkits in my computer, You stop me from using my content I bought the way I want? pretend to own _MY_ hardware? Enough of that bullshit.

This is a revolt [facebook.com] against the greediness and blatant disrespect for the consumer that comes from the mpaa/riaa.

SAVE THE NUMBERS, SAVE THE WORLD. REMEMBER The 1st of MAY.

Re:Beyond the hex (1)

slapout (93640) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951335)

DRM doesn't stop piracy. People still copy a DVD bit for bit and sell them at flea markets for five bucks. CSS and all.

Screw digg! (4, Insightful)

Cervantes (612861) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951213)

Yeah, screw Digg! Those bastards, censoring shit, trying to hide things, giving in to "The Man" and the fear of legal battles. Fuck them! Slashdot rules!

Hey, on a completely unrelated note, can anyone point me to that copy of book 3 of Scientology that was posted here a few years back?
kthnx.

Re:Screw digg! (5, Insightful)

metlin (258108) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951299)

The thing is, Slashdot took off the Scientology crap because they were served a legal notice.

Also, Slashdot also provided a detailed writeup on what had happened, why they were taking down the said comments (which happened to paste entire texts) and gave some pointers on finding the said information.

Which is completely different from Digg removing the story and not telling anyone about it (until of course the users discovered it). And their response was an after-the-fact event, made worse by the fact that Digg receives sponsorship for Diggnation from the very folks this thing seems to piss off.

The two are completely different, and Slashdot did it right. Digg did not do it right and the users are revolting. More power to them.

Re:Screw digg! (1)

VendettaMF (629699) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951421)

Marginally different situation in that that was a genuinely copyrighted text, while this is an uncopyrighted/uncopyrightable number.

The fact that the patriot act allows criminalization for sharing of mere numbers is the real debate point here.

With Apologies To Allan Sherman (4, Interesting)

Tackhead (54550) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951251)

Ahem. You know it's gonna be one of those weird filks when I post with "With Apologies To" in the Subject: line. Not sure how this got here. Probably the same twisted place that Natalie's Restaurant came from.

At any rate, this is a parody of Allan Sherman's tirade against all-digit dialing, "The Let's All Call Up AT&T And Protest To The President March". By staggering coincidence, the original was inspired by someone posting it in on USENET in the .mp3.comedy group. Weren't me, although my parents turned me onto Mr. Sherman's parodies by giving me their vinyl original that they'd owned since before I was born.

By even more coincidence, you can sing it as either: "Let's all post the Processing Key and fuck AACSLA" March, for rather obvious reasons, or the "Let's all post To D-I-G-G and say 'fark you' to Kevin Rose" March, (on account of every single story on digg.com's front page, as the original poster already linked to in TFA)

By utterly unsurprising coincidence, and like every filk I write here, this parody is in the public domain, and you can sing it however you like, although in this case it'll probably be funnier if you keep the numbers the way they was written.

AACS VERSION:

It's the "Let's all post the processing key and fuck AACSLA!" march!
Watch their lawyers worry and fidget,
Cease and DE-sisting sixteen hex digits!

So let's all post the processing key and fuck AACSLA, march!
So protest! (so protest!)
Do your best! (do your best!)
Let us show them that we post in unity.
If they won't (if they won't!),
Change the rules (change the rules!),
Let's buy our movies from another monopoly!

Let's all post the processing key and fuck AACSLA march.
Let us wake their landsharks from slumber,
Get a pencil, I'll give you their number.

It's Nine, Eff-nine, One-one, Two, Nine-D,
SevenTY-four, Eee-three, Five-B... (dash!)
Dee-eight, four-one, five-six, Cee-five,
Sixty-three, fifty-six, eight-eight... (hyphen!)
And now that you're on the right road,
Don't forget to end with Cee-0h!

Here's to freedom and fair use! 09F9! 1102s!
Watch your HD-DVD! 9D74! E35B!
Let's keep that 16-byte key alive!
D841! 56C5! AACS is totally broke! 6356! 88C0! Hooray!

To arnezami's mental fiber,
We'll erect a triumphal arch!
For the "let's all post the processing key and fuck AACSLA!" march.

And since we're long (about 2 and a half months!) past the point that a parody of the AACS key wouldn't be complete without the
DIGG VERSION [digg.com] :

It's the "Let's all post To D-I-G-G and say 'fark you' to Kevin Rose" march!
Watch him worry, watch as he fidgets,
As his users post sixteen hex digits!
So let's all post to D-I-G-G and say 'fuck you' to Kevin Rose march.
So protest! (so protest!)
Do your best! (do your best!)
Let us show him that we digg in unity.
If he won't (if he won't!),
Change the rules (change the rules!),
Let's take our pageviews to Slashdot's company!

Let's all post to D-I-G-G and say 'fuck you' to Kevin Rose march.
Let us wake him up in his slumber.
Get a pencil, I'll give you his number.

It's Nine, Eff-nine, One-one, Two, Nine-D,
SevenTY-four, Eee-three, Five-B... (dash!)
Dee-eight, four-one, five-six, Cee-five,
Sixty-three, fifty-six, eight-eight... (hyphen!)
And now that you're on the right road,
Don't forget to end with Cee-0h!

Here's to freedom and fair use! 09F9! 1102s!
Watch your HD-DVD! 9D74! E35B!
Let's keep that 16-byte key alive! D841! 56C5!
AACS is totally broke! 6356! 88C0! Hooray!

To arnezami's mental fiber,
We'll erect a triumphal arch!
For the let's all post to D-I-G-G and say 'fuck you' to Kevin Rose march.

And don't make me deal with this "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 35.7)", because it's a long pair of filks, and I can make it a lot longer by posting 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0", and it's not my fault that Allan Sherman wrote the original with a whole bunch of short lines, and a whole break consisting of nothing but the reading of digits in his original protest of all-digit dialing.

Hah (1)

buffer-overflowed (588867) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951255)

Digg is in open revolt. This isn't surprising. Funny as hell, but not surprising.

Oh well, it was a horrible site for any kind of discussion anyway.

Re:Hah (1)

ResidntGeek (772730) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951373)

No, it's surprising. Digg users never care about anything intelligent like this. I'm utterly surprised that they're not in open revolt about all the stories being about that dumb number and not high-larious Youtube videos.

Heh (1)

TiCL (1063546) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951297)

Re:Heh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18951415)

And yet it was still up before the slashdot story....

On-topic comment (5, Interesting)

Old Wolf (56093) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951307)

Something that nobody's explained, since this story broke:

Whose bright idea was it to use the same 128-bit symmetric key for every DVD ??

NB. Please don't mod this off-topic just because I said it wasn't.

Let's hope... (1)

denelson83 (841254) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951311)

...that this shows those greedy MAFIAA folks that consumers don't want to be just consumers!

I'm with Digg (1)

astrashe (7452) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951317)

Digg doesn't want to get sued. That's not unreasonable.

People are posting the same story over and over again. It's functioning as a defacto DoS attack on Digg, too -- they're not nearly as interesting now as they usually are.

That number is out there. It's not going away. It's not useful to many of the people who insist on posting it or reading it, either -- unless you're writing a player. So why should Digg get sued? How does that make the world a better place?

Re:I'm with Digg (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18951383)

Let's say I don't like people who wear pants. In fact, if you wear pants, I'm going to send you a notice that I'll sue you if you don't cease and desist. Are you going to stop wearing pants because you're afraid of being sued? No? Why is that?

It's because wearing pants is fucking legal. So are numbers. That's why people are so upset about this -- the industry gorillas want you to believe that knowing about this number is illegal, and Digg is simply bowing to them.

09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0, by the way.

Chilling Effects (1)

underwhelm (53409) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951401)

Digg won't get sued if there's no creditable lawsuit. Digg's users are forcing them to think carefully before capitulating to the sort of C&D letter that people often take at face value even if there's no legitimate legal peril.

it's called the "Streisand effect" (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18951327)

this is a story as old as time (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951347)

whenever someone in power tries to censor something, they only wind up giving whatever they were intending to censor free advertising. in effect, that which otherwise would have gone unnoticed, they immortalize. happens time and time and time again

the ayatollahs and salman rushdie [wikipedia.org]

rudy giuliani and some profane art [wikipedia.org]

it must be some sort of corollary to that old axiom "information wants to be free": something like "if you try to cage information, you give it steroids" or something. somebody more poetic than me help me out here

Cunning Plan? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18951351)

Has it occurred to anyone here that Digg did this on purpose, to show the lawyers that threatening legal action to try and stop the spread of this information is counter productive? By removing those articles, Digg has made that number very very popular.

Take It To The Streets (1, Insightful)

MrNonchalant (767683) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951367)

With both Digg and Slashdot in open revolt (well, Slashdot actually encouraged it) I say it's time to take this broader. Let's take this to the streets, the news media, and anyone who will listen. Subversive protest against an unjust law. I'm considering posting this number around my school, what will you do?

My goodness... (1)

denelson83 (841254) | more than 7 years ago | (#18951393)

Is it just a coincidence that this revolt is occurring during a full moon?

digg had a horrible lapse in judgement (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18951399)

If digg had only let the first story go, it would have disappeared in an hour and no one would have said a word (except the MPAA or who ever the governing body is). Now, digg has compromised their integrity and most likely lost several thousand or more users.

It's sort of like when you tell a little lie. Then you have to remember the lie as you make up more and more lies to increase the credibility of the original lie.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?