<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Architectures of Control in the Digital Environment</title>
	<atom:link href="http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/architectures-of-control-in-the-digital-environment/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk</link>
	<description>Using design to influence behaviour</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 15:13:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Smile, you&#8217;re on Countermanded Camera at fulminate // Architectures of Control</title>
		<link>http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/architectures-of-control-in-the-digital-environment/comment-page-1/#comment-77777</link>
		<dc:creator>Smile, you&#8217;re on Countermanded Camera at fulminate // Architectures of Control</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jul 2007 09:23:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/?page_id=5#comment-77777</guid>
		<description>[...] We&#8217;ve looked before at a number of technologies and products aimed at &#8216;preventing&#8217; photography and image recording in some way, from censoring photographs of &#8216;copyrighted content&#8217; and banknotes, to Georgia Tech&#8217;s CCD-flooding system. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] We&#8217;ve looked before at a number of technologies and products aimed at &#8216;preventing&#8217; photography and image recording in some way, from censoring photographs of &#8216;copyrighted content&#8217; and banknotes, to Georgia Tech&#8217;s CCD-flooding system. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Education, forcing functions and understanding at fulminate // Architectures of Control</title>
		<link>http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/architectures-of-control-in-the-digital-environment/comment-page-1/#comment-31338</link>
		<dc:creator>Education, forcing functions and understanding at fulminate // Architectures of Control</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Jan 2007 08:38:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/?page_id=5#comment-31338</guid>
		<description>[...] We saw earlier that there seems to be little point in educational software limiting the number of guesses a student can have at the answer, at least when the student isn&#8217;t allowed to proceed until the correct answer is entered. I&#8217;m not saying any credit should be awarded for simply guessing (it probably shouldn&#8217;t), just that deliberately restricting progress isn&#8217;t usually desirable in education. But it is in security: indeed that&#8217;s what most password and PIN implementations use. Regular readers of the blog will know that the work of security researchers such as Bruce Schneier, Ross Anderson, Ed Felten and Alex Halderman is frequently mentioned, often in relation to digital rights management, but looking at forcing functions in an educational context also shows how relevant security research is to other areas of design. Security techniques say &#8220;don&#8217;t let that happen until this has happened&#8221;; so do many architectures of control. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] We saw earlier that there seems to be little point in educational software limiting the number of guesses a student can have at the answer, at least when the student isn&#8217;t allowed to proceed until the correct answer is entered. I&#8217;m not saying any credit should be awarded for simply guessing (it probably shouldn&#8217;t), just that deliberately restricting progress isn&#8217;t usually desirable in education. But it is in security: indeed that&#8217;s what most password and PIN implementations use. Regular readers of the blog will know that the work of security researchers such as Bruce Schneier, Ross Anderson, Ed Felten and Alex Halderman is frequently mentioned, often in relation to digital rights management, but looking at forcing functions in an educational context also shows how relevant security research is to other areas of design. Security techniques say &#8220;don&#8217;t let that happen until this has happened&#8221;; so do many architectures of control. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mila</title>
		<link>http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/architectures-of-control-in-the-digital-environment/comment-page-1/#comment-4796</link>
		<dc:creator>Mila</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Aug 2006 23:56:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/?page_id=5#comment-4796</guid>
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.techknowbizzle.com/2006/07/you-can-do-that-concise-drm-lesson.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;DRM technology&lt;/a&gt; is also an essential component in &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.essentialsecurity.com/learn_more.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;email anti-theft software&lt;/a&gt;. Though DRM is often associated with protecting media files from redistribution, it also stops unintended forwarding and misuse of email and attachments. For example, using DRM-based email anti-theft controls, the sender can disable the recipient from using functions such as copy/print/forward/screen capture to ensure the confidentiality of all messages and documents.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.techknowbizzle.com/2006/07/you-can-do-that-concise-drm-lesson.html" rel="nofollow">DRM technology</a> is also an essential component in <a href="http://www.essentialsecurity.com/learn_more.htm" rel="nofollow">email anti-theft software</a>. Though DRM is often associated with protecting media files from redistribution, it also stops unintended forwarding and misuse of email and attachments. For example, using DRM-based email anti-theft controls, the sender can disable the recipient from using functions such as copy/print/forward/screen capture to ensure the confidentiality of all messages and documents.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Architectures of Control in Design &#187; DRM now the &#8216;biggest issue&#8217; in preserving information for the future</title>
		<link>http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/architectures-of-control-in-the-digital-environment/comment-page-1/#comment-3006</link>
		<dc:creator>Architectures of Control in Design &#187; DRM now the &#8216;biggest issue&#8217; in preserving information for the future</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Aug 2006 13:50:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/?page_id=5#comment-3006</guid>
		<description>[...] As I see it, as a member of the public, if my tax money is going to be spent in any way upholding copyright, I want that benefit for rightsholders to come with a benefit for the public interest, i.e. that the rightsholders must permit copies to be made for the public interest, with no DRM or other technical restrictions in place. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] As I see it, as a member of the public, if my tax money is going to be spent in any way upholding copyright, I want that benefit for rightsholders to come with a benefit for the public interest, i.e. that the rightsholders must permit copies to be made for the public interest, with no DRM or other technical restrictions in place. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Television Archiving &#187; Blog Archive &#187; DRM now the ‘biggest issue’ in preserving information for the future</title>
		<link>http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/architectures-of-control-in-the-digital-environment/comment-page-1/#comment-2234</link>
		<dc:creator>Television Archiving &#187; Blog Archive &#187; DRM now the ‘biggest issue’ in preserving information for the future</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Jul 2006 20:52:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/?page_id=5#comment-2234</guid>
		<description>[...] As I see it, as a member of the public, if my tax money is going to be spent in any way upholding copyright, I want that benefit for rightsholders to come with a benefit for the public interest, i.e. that the rightsholders must permit copies to be made for the public interest, with no DRM or other technical restrictions in place. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] As I see it, as a member of the public, if my tax money is going to be spent in any way upholding copyright, I want that benefit for rightsholders to come with a benefit for the public interest, i.e. that the rightsholders must permit copies to be made for the public interest, with no DRM or other technical restrictions in place. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Architectures of Control in Design &#187; EFF: Another Endangered Gizmo - the Neuros MPEG4 Recorder 2</title>
		<link>http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/architectures-of-control-in-the-digital-environment/comment-page-1/#comment-1616</link>
		<dc:creator>Architectures of Control in Design &#187; EFF: Another Endangered Gizmo - the Neuros MPEG4 Recorder 2</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2006 21:31:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/?page_id=5#comment-1616</guid>
		<description>[...] Of course, the R2 device&#8217;s legality - as a video analogue-to-digital converter - is threatened by proposed US legislation aimed at &#8216;plugging the analogue hole&#8216;, hence its &#8216;endangered gizmo&#8216; status applied by the Electronic Frontier Foundation. This would seem to be a case where a device really has been designed with the users&#8217; needs and convenience uppermost in mind, yet it may be ruled out of existence by a legislature which listens more to (certain) corporate lobbying than to its own citizens.  Please share this!These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Of course, the R2 device&#8217;s legality &#8211; as a video analogue-to-digital converter &#8211; is threatened by proposed US legislation aimed at &#8216;plugging the analogue hole&#8216;, hence its &#8216;endangered gizmo&#8216; status applied by the Electronic Frontier Foundation. This would seem to be a case where a device really has been designed with the users&#8217; needs and convenience uppermost in mind, yet it may be ruled out of existence by a legislature which listens more to (certain) corporate lobbying than to its own citizens.  Please share this!These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Architectures of Control in Design &#187; &#8216;Researchers develop prototype system to thwart unwanted video and still photography&#8217;</title>
		<link>http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/architectures-of-control-in-the-digital-environment/comment-page-1/#comment-1288</link>
		<dc:creator>Architectures of Control in Design &#187; &#8216;Researchers develop prototype system to thwart unwanted video and still photography&#8217;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jun 2006 21:10:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/?page_id=5#comment-1288</guid>
		<description>[...] EDIT: There are some parallels here with the &#8216;analogue hole prevention&#8217; mechanisms I looked at in Architectures of control in the digital environment, most notably Hewlett-Packard&#8217;s patented ‘paparazzi-proof’ camera-phone image inhibitor system.  Please share this!These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] EDIT: There are some parallels here with the &#8216;analogue hole prevention&#8217; mechanisms I looked at in Architectures of control in the digital environment, most notably Hewlett-Packard&#8217;s patented ‘paparazzi-proof’ camera-phone image inhibitor system.  Please share this!These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Architectures of Control in Design &#187; Breaking Racial Sound Barriers</title>
		<link>http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/architectures-of-control-in-the-digital-environment/comment-page-1/#comment-929</link>
		<dc:creator>Architectures of Control in Design &#187; Breaking Racial Sound Barriers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 May 2006 20:30:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/?page_id=5#comment-929</guid>
		<description>[...] Again, while Farley&#8217;s focus is DRM in music, he very clearly outlines some of the other ways that architectures of control—particularly &#8216;trusted&#8217; computing—could develop: In the next few years, digital rights management will become more Orwellian. The line between digital rights and civil rights will blur. Entertainment companies already spike their products with codes that prevent them from being used in unauthorized ways. In the near future, corporate interests will insert even more restrictive programs into their wares — ones that shut down computers, spy on users, erase files, and even automatically siphon off private bank accounts when corporate music interests are infringed. Lower-income groups — mostly made up of people of color — will be the least able to resist these attacks on their virtual civil rights. Digital revolutionaries will have more fighting to do. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Again, while Farley&#8217;s focus is DRM in music, he very clearly outlines some of the other ways that architectures of control—particularly &#8216;trusted&#8217; computing—could develop: In the next few years, digital rights management will become more Orwellian. The line between digital rights and civil rights will blur. Entertainment companies already spike their products with codes that prevent them from being used in unauthorized ways. In the near future, corporate interests will insert even more restrictive programs into their wares — ones that shut down computers, spy on users, erase files, and even automatically siphon off private bank accounts when corporate music interests are infringed. Lower-income groups — mostly made up of people of color — will be the least able to resist these attacks on their virtual civil rights. Digital revolutionaries will have more fighting to do. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Architectures of Control in Design &#187; Another dystopian vision</title>
		<link>http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/architectures-of-control-in-the-digital-environment/comment-page-1/#comment-95</link>
		<dc:creator>Architectures of Control in Design &#187; Another dystopian vision</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Feb 2006 17:05:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/?page_id=5#comment-95</guid>
		<description>[...] Tarmle has synthesised many of the implications of DRM and other architectures of control, from analogue hole blockers to the idea of a few marginalised die-hard practical technology enthusiasts existing on the edge of society into a chilling prophecy. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Tarmle has synthesised many of the implications of DRM and other architectures of control, from analogue hole blockers to the idea of a few marginalised die-hard practical technology enthusiasts existing on the edge of society into a chilling prophecy. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Architectures of Control in Design &#187; Richard Stallman&#8217;s &#8216;Right To Read&#8217; dystopia growing closer every day</title>
		<link>http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/architectures-of-control-in-the-digital-environment/comment-page-1/#comment-94</link>
		<dc:creator>Architectures of Control in Design &#187; Richard Stallman&#8217;s &#8216;Right To Read&#8217; dystopia growing closer every day</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Feb 2006 16:34:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/?page_id=5#comment-94</guid>
		<description>[...] We seem to be accelerating towards the nightmare vision presented by Richard Stallman in his 1997 article, &#8216;The Right to Read&#8217;, ninety years too early, and investigated so thoroughly by Cambridge&#8217;s Ross Anderson. (See also here for more discussion of DRM and &#8216;trusted&#8217; computing). [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] We seem to be accelerating towards the nightmare vision presented by Richard Stallman in his 1997 article, &#8216;The Right to Read&#8217;, ninety years too early, and investigated so thoroughly by Cambridge&#8217;s Ross Anderson. (See also here for more discussion of DRM and &#8216;trusted&#8217; computing). [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Architectures of Control in Design &#187; Analogue/Analog Hole Bill returns</title>
		<link>http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/architectures-of-control-in-the-digital-environment/comment-page-1/#comment-17</link>
		<dc:creator>Architectures of Control in Design &#187; Analogue/Analog Hole Bill returns</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Dec 2005 09:53:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/?page_id=5#comment-17</guid>
		<description>[...] Via EFF DeepLinks, the news that a new &#8220;Digital Transition Content Security Act&#8221; is being proposed in the US - specifically targetting video ADCs (see discussion of the analogue hole).  &#8220;Digitizers and digital media devices that won&#8217;t jump through the specified outrageous regulatory hoops - automatically deleting protected analog content after ninety minutes; outputting only &#8220;down-rezzed&#8221; images, and satisfying &#8220;robustness criteria&#8221; that weld the hood shut against user modification and open source developers - are expected to simply turn off and refuse to convert watermark-protected analog video.&#8221; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Via EFF DeepLinks, the news that a new &#8220;Digital Transition Content Security Act&#8221; is being proposed in the US &#8211; specifically targetting video ADCs (see discussion of the analogue hole).  &#8220;Digitizers and digital media devices that won&#8217;t jump through the specified outrageous regulatory hoops &#8211; automatically deleting protected analog content after ninety minutes; outputting only &#8220;down-rezzed&#8221; images, and satisfying &#8220;robustness criteria&#8221; that weld the hood shut against user modification and open source developers &#8211; are expected to simply turn off and refuse to convert watermark-protected analog video.&#8221; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Architectures of Control in Design &#187; &#8220;The progressive and dispersed installation of a new system of domination&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/architectures-of-control-in-the-digital-environment/comment-page-1/#comment-11</link>
		<dc:creator>Architectures of Control in Design &#187; &#8220;The progressive and dispersed installation of a new system of domination&#8221;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Dec 2005 11:44:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/?page_id=5#comment-11</guid>
		<description>[...] Again, this is clearly the biometric ID card, but also introduces the notion of arbitrariness that seems to recur in examining many current architectures of control, particularly DRM, and analogue hole prevention devices. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Again, this is clearly the biometric ID card, but also introduces the notion of arbitrariness that seems to recur in examining many current architectures of control, particularly DRM, and analogue hole prevention devices. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Architectures of Control in Design &#187; Intel Viiv: control through integrated systems</title>
		<link>http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/architectures-of-control-in-the-digital-environment/comment-page-1/#comment-8</link>
		<dc:creator>Architectures of Control in Design &#187; Intel Viiv: control through integrated systems</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Dec 2005 11:09:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/?page_id=5#comment-8</guid>
		<description>[...] Is control through integration a distinct classification in architectures of control? In a sense, all DRM/lockware is control through integration, but where devices are specifically designed to integrate to allow the promulgator to control the environment for innovation in technology, then this is close to what Ernest Miller and Andreas Bovens have noted (see discussion)—innovation lock-out through system architecture. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Is control through integration a distinct classification in architectures of control? In a sense, all DRM/lockware is control through integration, but where devices are specifically designed to integrate to allow the promulgator to control the environment for innovation in technology, then this is close to what Ernest Miller and Andreas Bovens have noted (see discussion)—innovation lock-out through system architecture. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 2.374 seconds -->
