Comments on: Dishonourable discharge?

By: Frankie Roberto

Frankie Roberto — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 20:24:23 +0000

I’d be interested to see some actual evidence for this.

How is the battery ‘authentication’ achieved? Surely it can’t be too hard for third-party manufacturers to fake the authentication signal??

By: None of 3

None of 3 — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 14:37:59 +0000

This isn’t really a security issue at all. Not letting people use their network resources without paying is — that’s their communications security. Not letting people use third-party batteries and get full value from them is not security. It’s just plain greed. People using third-party batteries and getting full value from them is not a security breach. It’s called “competition”, and it’s a feature, not a bug, of our markets.

By: mako

mako — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 14:28:30 +0000

I read this in Beyond Fear as well and the fact that this can happen remains deeply troubling to me.

It ends up bothering/influencing Nokia’s consumers just little enough to make opposition by consumers difficult. It’s not quite like printer drivers which are bought routinely enough and that the underhanded tactics there might be encourage people to buy from a different printer.

Thanks for highlighting this.

By: University Update - DRM - Dishonourable discharge?

University Update - DRM - Dishonourable discharge? — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 11:46:16 +0000

[...] YouTube Contact the Webmaster Link to Article drm Dishonourable discharge? » Posted at fulminate // Architectures of Control on Tuesday, August 07, 2007 This article contains copywritten material. Please click on the "View Original Article" link below to view the article on the author’s site. View Original Article » [...]