Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ATI Evergreen 3D Code May Soon Go Into Gallium3D

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by V!NCENT View Post
    About the reverse engineering part; please don't do it. AMD puts great effort into open source and if anyone screws them over then gues what we'll lose.
    How would reverse engineering it "screw anyone over"? The problem isn't that they don't want UVD to be implemented in the open source drivers, the problem is that they don't have the legal go-ahead to release the required DOCUMENTATION. If the functions can be figured out WITHOUT AMD DOCUMENTATION, this would NOT be screwing anyone over.

    Comment


    • Actually, no. The problem is that we don't want information in public that could impact our ability to ship a robust DRM implementation on other OSes. It doesn't make a whit of difference whether that information is published or reverse engineered. If you want a bad analogy (hey, I'm out of coffee) it's like being shot in the foot. It's a Bad Thing whether you do it or someone else does it, but you still don't want to do it yourself

      Comment


      • So, reverse-engineering Nvidia's decoding hardware would be a better thing?

        Cause then, you could release the documentation anyway, as all the competitors' decoding is already out in the open.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
          So, reverse-engineering Nvidia's decoding hardware would be a better thing?
          sure, if you want to screw nvidia and possibly get into a bit of a lawsuit, go ahead
          Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
          Cause then, you could release the documentation anyway, as all the competitors' decoding is already out in the open.
          doesn't matter if the copy protection is broken. It already is (blueray movies CAN be ripped and copied), but that doesn't lift the contractual obligations of the GPU vendors.
          The MPAA (or whoever makes those contracts) isn't going to say "Oh well, copy protection was a bad idea anyway. You may now freely copy our movies on all platforms. Have fun!"

          Comment


          • Originally posted by rohcQaH View Post
            doesn't matter if the copy protection is broken. It already is (blueray movies CAN be ripped and copied), but that doesn't lift the contractual obligations of the GPU vendors.
            The MPAA (or whoever makes those contracts) isn't going to say "Oh well, copy protection was a bad idea anyway. You may now freely copy our movies on all platforms. Have fun!"
            No, but if it's broken on all GPU platforms equally, then they would have to end BluRay and DVD playback on all PCs, and they don't want to do this.

            In short, they might screw either ATi or Nvidia, but not both. They would be shooting themselves in the foot.

            Comment


            • Actually, I'm just asking if stereo support is accounted for, so that supporting it won't cause major disruption if/when the devs can get around to it. Stereo support is _part_ of OpenGL (google: OpenGL Quad Buffer stereo) anyway. I'm not suggesting that they drop any current activities or anything of the sort... It's just a question / concern. That's all.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                we don't want information in public that could impact our ability to ship a robust DRM implementation on other OSes.
                Bah! Don't give me that.... I can tell by the things that you say that you have an unscratchable itch to give out all the restricted super-secret DRM stuff that you can possibly get your hands on -- free to the world, however, I know that you're not going to because we both know that you are far more useful out of jail than letting the DRM out and spending decades in lockup.

                If completely reversed, I know that you'd secretly be cheering. Everyone would.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
                  Bah! Don't give me that.... I can tell by the things that you say that you have an unscratchable itch to give out all the restricted super-secret DRM stuff that you can possibly get your hands on -- free to the world, however, I know that you're not going to because we both know that you are far more useful out of jail than letting the DRM out and spending decades in lockup.

                  If completely reversed, I know that you'd secretly be cheering. Everyone would.
                  uhm, what?

                  When jail time is an option, you'd think he'd have different issues to contemplate than his "usefulness" to whatever cause.

                  Also remember that overseeing the OSS-drivers is only half of bridgman's job. He's also responsible for some unspecified things related to that DRM stuff he likes to talk about so often (what a coincidence ).
                  So, should someone break their DRM, guess who'll have to pick up the pieces? I wouldn't assume he'd be too happy about that.


                  last but not least, RE'ing their DRM would change a lot. Ok, you can watch your videos GPU accelerated for a while. But even if bridgman manages to release both AMD's and NVIDIAs DRM, it'll cost both companies money, and guess where budget cuts hit first? Maybe some OSS effort which doesn't have a measurable ROI anyway? And one way or another, the MPAA is going to react, and that rarely turns out well for their customers.


                  The root cause we'd all like to see destroyed is a totally different one. DRM is just a symptom.

                  Comment


                  • If the _AMD_ implementation of the DRM was cracked then pirates would only laugh and jawn (ripped versions are on the web anyway) and a legeon of angry FLOSS supporters would go after the cracker with burning torches for making AMD stop giving out documentation and working drivers, me included.

                    I'm serious.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by rohcQaH View Post
                      uhm, what?

                      When jail time is an option, you'd think he'd have different issues to contemplate than his "usefulness" to whatever cause.
                      Jail time was probably a bit of an exaggeration. Maybe not. Of course you realize that you risk jail time just by waking up in the morning -- the simple chance that some dipsh** cop decides to attack you just to meet quota, or just because your skin is a different color than his. The question is HOW MUCH of a risk are you willing to take in order to accomplish something good?

                      And as I said, obviously in his case, the risk exceeds the benefits -- both to him personally, as well as to society in general.

                      Also remember that overseeing the OSS-drivers is only half of bridgman's job. He's also responsible for some unspecified things related to that DRM stuff he likes to talk about so often (what a coincidence ).
                      So.....?
                      So, should someone break their DRM, guess who'll have to pick up the pieces? I wouldn't assume he'd be too happy about that.
                      If there are no pieces big enough to pick up?

                      last but not least, RE'ing their DRM would change a lot. Ok, you can watch your videos GPU accelerated for a while.
                      Remember that the DRM is NOT the objective here... the UVD is the objective. The DRM *MIGHT* just be a casualty of war... assuming that you can even figure out what its doing with all that encryption going on... I certainly wouldn't waste time trying to break DRM at that level -- much better idea to just continue along the same efforts as the doom9/vlc's libaacs/libbdplus work.
                      But even if bridgman manages to release both AMD's and NVIDIAs DRM, it'll cost both companies money,
                      Short term cost for long term gain... get that DRM into a separate DRM-block so that it doesn't break when the next version of UVD comes out. Then nobody has to worry about it. The problem is that there is a risk associated with releasing the UVD specs -- a risk that wouldn't even exist if the thing was designed with open source support in mind. So a little short term expense so that there is no longer risk of losing DRM when the UVD docs are released.
                      and guess where budget cuts hit first? Maybe some OSS effort which doesn't have a measurable ROI anyway?
                      I think that if something of this magnitude happened, that if DRM was broken as a side-effect of working out UVD, then a proper analysis of HOW that break happened would reveal that DRM wasn't even the objective! Which makes it DANGEROUS to put it so close to something that WAS the objective! And so it wouldn't hit against open source efforts because open source isn't even an OPTION -- it is a necessity... and it is much bigger than the 1% that the msflunkies would have you believe.
                      And one way or another, the MPAA is going to react, and that rarely turns out well for their customers.
                      So they'll deny new DRM-infested titles on AMD chips. Cry me a river. The customer might not like this in the short term, but long term, boycotting DRM might help.
                      The root cause we'd all like to see destroyed is a totally different one. DRM is just a symptom.
                      You mean government regulation? Because that is the problem where this originates. Deregulation would put the industries into proper and natural competition, which would enable ways around DRM and ultimately a dropping of DRM since it just causes too much headache for the customers when the industries can't form themselves into such unnatural cartels.

                      It would work itself out like this;
                      1) First stage is vendor A decides they don't want to intentionally limit their customers any more, so they drop HDCP.
                      2) MPAA learns of this, so blacklists vendor A's keyset.
                      3) In the face of no longer being able to provide DRM content to their customers any more, vendor A hires Hack-RM to develop a way around the DRM so that their products continue to provide the content.
                      4) Vendor B sees this and decides to follow vendor A and switches to Hack-RM.
                      5) MPAA tries to figure out ways to deal with this hack and implements DRMv2 and enables vendors C through F with it.
                      6) A new company arrives... MPBB. They have a great new scheme for DRM, so they sell it to some of the content providers saying that MPAA's DRMv1 got broken, how can you trust their DRMv2.... so now we have a competing DRM standard.
                      7) Some of the content providers switch to MPBB's DRM and start shipping stuff with it.
                      8) Hack-RM starts working on MPBB's new DRM and MPAA's DRMv2.
                      9) For technical reasons, vendor D and F can't upgrade any of their equipment to MPBB or DRMv2, so if any of their customers want to see any of that, they'll need new equipment.
                      10) Hack-RM has gotten around MPBB.
                      11) D decides to software-upgrade their old customers to Hack-RM for both MPBB and DRMv2. New hardware gets official DRMv2, Hack-RM for MPBB.
                      12) F decides to forget about their old customers altogether, and go official for both DRMv2 and MPBB.
                      13) Content providers are selling content in DRMv1, DRMv2, and MPBB.

                      What hardware will deal with what?

                      14) Customers get wind of the entire situation and realize that D's OLD hardware can decode EVERYTHING.
                      15) Some hardware cloner in China starts cloning D's OLD hardware and it starts spreading.
                      16) At some point as this spirals out of control, the customers are getting thoroughly confused about what device does what. New forms of DRM are showing up every day, nothing will play content in ALL of the forms. People end up buying content for a while and quickly realize that its a crapshoot whether it will play or not -- virtually ALL begin resorting to downloading the content decrypted from the internet and quit purchasing content. At least from the internet, they know that it'll play for them.
                      17) facing a huge drop in sales, the content providers realize that it is because of the confusing situation with regards to DRM. They say f-it and begin selling their content DRM-free, because at least SOME of the consumers will buy it, with the confidence that it will actually WORK.

                      And, of course, somewhere in the mix, MPAA tries to form a cartel among content providers. Some of them join, some of still don't like MPAA. It doesn't last long because they're all trying to undermine each other's bottom line.


                      And that is how DRM would die without government regulation.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X