<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>loup-vaillant</author><text>&amp;#62; &lt;i&gt;But that doesn&apos;t seem so dystopian. Everyone is a publisher now.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;When you think it through, it does seem dystopian.  Imagine that e-ink matures, and paper isn&apos;t that useful any more.  That we no longer purchase dead-tree copies of our books, magazines, and so on.  I think that can happen.  I read right now a novel on my electronic reader, even though I have a dead-tree copy, because my reader is lighter and slimmer than my book.&lt;p&gt;Now, how do I lend you a book for which I have no dead-tree copy?  I can&apos;t give you such a piece of dead-tree (and naturally lose it for myself).  All I can do is make a copy and give it to you.  And then I&apos;m a publisher.  And then what I&apos;m doing is forbidden.  And then I can&apos;t even lend you my book.&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;(One could imagine laws/DRM that would erase the copy I own if I ever give another copy to someone else.  However, I don&apos;t think the IP Lords would want even that.  They&apos;d say it harms their revenue.)&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;But that&apos;s not dystopian enough.  True dystopia is when the means of enforcing it kick in: the only know way right now is a &quot;total surveillance&quot; regime, where free software itself is forbidden.</text><parent_chain><item><author>pg</author><text>Predicting DRM phoning home in 1997 does not seem startlingly prescient.  Nor locked down systems; those already existed.&lt;p&gt;The only novel idea I see here is the point that copyright, which was originally a restriction on publishers, has now become a restriction on consumers.  But that doesn&apos;t seem so dystopian.  Everyone is a publisher now.</text></item><item><author>jaekwon</author><text>&lt;i&gt;From the &quot;Right to Read&quot; 1997-02...&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Dan had learned that each book had a copyright monitor that reported when and where it was read, and by whom, to Central Licensing.&quot; -&amp;#62; &lt;i&gt;Streaming content, DMCA tech&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;It was also possible to bypass the copyright monitors by installing a modified system kernel.&quot; -&amp;#62; &lt;i&gt;Jailbreaking&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;But not only were they illegal, like debuggers—you could not install one if you had one, without knowing your computer&apos;s root password. And neither the FBI nor Microsoft Support would tell you that.&quot; -&amp;#62; &lt;i&gt;trusted computing&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;But ordinary users started using [free debugging tools] to bypass copyright monitors, and eventually a judge ruled that this had become their principal use in actual practice. This meant they were illegal; the debuggers&apos; developers were sent to prison.&quot; -&amp;#62; &lt;i&gt;DeCSS, Sony&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;----&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;From &quot;The Dangers of Software Patents&quot; 2004-05-24...&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Copyright covers a work of authorship. A patent covers an idea. ...... But a patent is an absolute monopoly on the use of an idea. Even if you could prove that you had the idea yourself, that would be irrelevant: you&apos;re still not allowed to use it.&quot; -&amp;#62;&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;Apple filed U.S. application Ser. No. 10/842,862 entitled “Multipoint Touchscreen,” filed on 2004-05-04 and published as U.S. Published Application No. 2006/0097991 on 2006-05-11.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;---&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;From &quot;Copyright and Globalization&quot; 2001-04-19...&lt;/i&gt; (Selected bits that were interesting to me)&lt;p&gt;&quot;In the ancient world, books were written by hand with a pen, …… you could copy a part of a book, then write some new words, copy some more and write some new words and on and on. This was called “writing a commentary” — that was a common thing to do — and these commentaries were appreciated. …… Now copyright was developed along with the use of the printing press and given the technology of the printing press, it had the effect of an industrial regulation. It didn&apos;t restrict what readers could do; it restricted what publishers and authors could do. ……  copyright law no longer acts as an industrial regulation; it is now a Draconian restriction on a general public. It used to be a restriction on publishers for the sake of authors. Now, for practical purposes, it&apos;s a restriction on a public for the sake of publishers. …… To enforce it requires surveillance — an intrusion — and harsh punishments, and we are seeing these being enacted into law in the U.S. and other countries.&quot; -&amp;#62; &lt;i&gt;NAFTA which is mentioned in the talk, SOPA, Protect IP, etc&lt;/i&gt;</text></item><item><author>pg</author><text>Can you give me some examples of specific predictions he made that you feel are most prescient?</text></item><item><author>Joakal</author><text>&quot;Right to read&quot; &lt;a href=&quot;http://falkvinge.net/2011/06/03/stallmans-the-right-to-read-becomes-dreaded-insane-reality/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://falkvinge.net/2011/06/03/stallmans-the-right-to-read-...&lt;/a&gt; (Related: &lt;a href=&quot;http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20069648-264/richard-stallman-break-free-of-e-book-chains/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20069648-264/richard-stall...&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Right_to_Read&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Right_to_Read&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;p&gt;Here&apos;s a lot more in the articles: &lt;a href=&quot;http://stallman.org/#politics&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://stallman.org/#politics&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;Edit: IFSO: Richard Stallman: The Dangers of Software Patents; 2004-05-24 (transcript) &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ifso.ie/documents/rms-2004-05-24.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.ifso.ie/documents/rms-2004-05-24.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;Copyright and Globalization in the Age of Computer Networks - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation (FSF) &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/copyright-and-globalization.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/copyright-and-globalization.h...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;2nd edit: You are a Terrorist (Du bist Terrorist) German, English Subtitles - YouTube &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdIA0jeW-24&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdIA0jeW-24&lt;/a&gt;</text></item><item><author>pg</author><text>This article doesn&apos;t seem to give any examples of specific predictions Stallman made that have turned out to be correct.  All the article seems to be saying is that Stallman seemed paranoid, and present events seem to justify paranoia.&lt;p&gt;(Incidentally, people always feel that.)&lt;p&gt;Can anyone give some examples of specific predictions Stallman made that seemed surprising at the time, but that have come true?  I&apos;m not saying there haven&apos;t been any, just that such a list would be more useful than this article.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Richard Stallman Was Right All Along</title><url>http://www.osnews.com/story/25469/Richard_Stallman_Was_Right_All_Along</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>__alexs</author><text>&amp;#62; Predicting DRM phoning home in 1997 does not seem startlingly prescient.&lt;p&gt;Since when was being prescient the sole marker of an ideas value?&lt;p&gt;What&apos;s interesting about Stallman is that he&apos;s been repeating the same material since the 80&apos;s, and it only gets more relevant. He might be a paranoid weirdo but he does seem to at least be paranoid about something that has it&apos;s roots in reality.&lt;p&gt;We might have increasing equality, and perhaps some additional freedom over our own bodies, but at the same time the wide spread deployment of mass surveillance tech has come at the same time.&lt;p&gt;&amp;#62; But that doesn&apos;t seem so dystopian. Everyone is a publisher now.&lt;p&gt;This is only not a dystopia if those publishers have sufficiently uncorrelated output and distribution channels. I&apos;m not sure that&apos;s the case.</text><parent_chain><item><author>pg</author><text>Predicting DRM phoning home in 1997 does not seem startlingly prescient.  Nor locked down systems; those already existed.&lt;p&gt;The only novel idea I see here is the point that copyright, which was originally a restriction on publishers, has now become a restriction on consumers.  But that doesn&apos;t seem so dystopian.  Everyone is a publisher now.</text></item><item><author>jaekwon</author><text>&lt;i&gt;From the &quot;Right to Read&quot; 1997-02...&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Dan had learned that each book had a copyright monitor that reported when and where it was read, and by whom, to Central Licensing.&quot; -&amp;#62; &lt;i&gt;Streaming content, DMCA tech&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;It was also possible to bypass the copyright monitors by installing a modified system kernel.&quot; -&amp;#62; &lt;i&gt;Jailbreaking&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;But not only were they illegal, like debuggers—you could not install one if you had one, without knowing your computer&apos;s root password. And neither the FBI nor Microsoft Support would tell you that.&quot; -&amp;#62; &lt;i&gt;trusted computing&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;But ordinary users started using [free debugging tools] to bypass copyright monitors, and eventually a judge ruled that this had become their principal use in actual practice. This meant they were illegal; the debuggers&apos; developers were sent to prison.&quot; -&amp;#62; &lt;i&gt;DeCSS, Sony&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;----&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;From &quot;The Dangers of Software Patents&quot; 2004-05-24...&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;Copyright covers a work of authorship. A patent covers an idea. ...... But a patent is an absolute monopoly on the use of an idea. Even if you could prove that you had the idea yourself, that would be irrelevant: you&apos;re still not allowed to use it.&quot; -&amp;#62;&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;Apple filed U.S. application Ser. No. 10/842,862 entitled “Multipoint Touchscreen,” filed on 2004-05-04 and published as U.S. Published Application No. 2006/0097991 on 2006-05-11.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;---&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;From &quot;Copyright and Globalization&quot; 2001-04-19...&lt;/i&gt; (Selected bits that were interesting to me)&lt;p&gt;&quot;In the ancient world, books were written by hand with a pen, …… you could copy a part of a book, then write some new words, copy some more and write some new words and on and on. This was called “writing a commentary” — that was a common thing to do — and these commentaries were appreciated. …… Now copyright was developed along with the use of the printing press and given the technology of the printing press, it had the effect of an industrial regulation. It didn&apos;t restrict what readers could do; it restricted what publishers and authors could do. ……  copyright law no longer acts as an industrial regulation; it is now a Draconian restriction on a general public. It used to be a restriction on publishers for the sake of authors. Now, for practical purposes, it&apos;s a restriction on a public for the sake of publishers. …… To enforce it requires surveillance — an intrusion — and harsh punishments, and we are seeing these being enacted into law in the U.S. and other countries.&quot; -&amp;#62; &lt;i&gt;NAFTA which is mentioned in the talk, SOPA, Protect IP, etc&lt;/i&gt;</text></item><item><author>pg</author><text>Can you give me some examples of specific predictions he made that you feel are most prescient?</text></item><item><author>Joakal</author><text>&quot;Right to read&quot; &lt;a href=&quot;http://falkvinge.net/2011/06/03/stallmans-the-right-to-read-becomes-dreaded-insane-reality/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://falkvinge.net/2011/06/03/stallmans-the-right-to-read-...&lt;/a&gt; (Related: &lt;a href=&quot;http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20069648-264/richard-stallman-break-free-of-e-book-chains/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20069648-264/richard-stall...&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Right_to_Read&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Right_to_Read&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;p&gt;Here&apos;s a lot more in the articles: &lt;a href=&quot;http://stallman.org/#politics&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://stallman.org/#politics&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;Edit: IFSO: Richard Stallman: The Dangers of Software Patents; 2004-05-24 (transcript) &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ifso.ie/documents/rms-2004-05-24.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.ifso.ie/documents/rms-2004-05-24.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;Copyright and Globalization in the Age of Computer Networks - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation (FSF) &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/copyright-and-globalization.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/copyright-and-globalization.h...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;2nd edit: You are a Terrorist (Du bist Terrorist) German, English Subtitles - YouTube &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdIA0jeW-24&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdIA0jeW-24&lt;/a&gt;</text></item><item><author>pg</author><text>This article doesn&apos;t seem to give any examples of specific predictions Stallman made that have turned out to be correct.  All the article seems to be saying is that Stallman seemed paranoid, and present events seem to justify paranoia.&lt;p&gt;(Incidentally, people always feel that.)&lt;p&gt;Can anyone give some examples of specific predictions Stallman made that seemed surprising at the time, but that have come true?  I&apos;m not saying there haven&apos;t been any, just that such a list would be more useful than this article.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Richard Stallman Was Right All Along</title><url>http://www.osnews.com/story/25469/Richard_Stallman_Was_Right_All_Along</url></story>