What is Digg?285 Comments
- RedHerringHack, on 10/12/2007, -16/+396Ha Ha. And ***** You AACS LA. Didn't you learn anything with DVDs?
I have the keys, The decryption algorithm is public domain, the forums are free speech.
You have lost, and will continue to lose in a poor way. - EmailAddress, on 10/12/2007, -14/+29302 E9 18 02 9D F4 E3 5A D8 61 56 C8 6A B6 88 CC ........
Can posting random hex characters get you in trouble?! - bemenaker, on 10/12/2007, -9/+273Uhm, asshats, you published it in a formal take down notice, those ARE public record, once in public record, always in public record. PWNED by self...... asshats
- lordsandwich, on 10/12/2007, -7/+139This reminds me of a poem I once wrote:
cirro nigh heft.
nigh won.
won, cirro too, nigh.
deed!
sever fore, eh.
tree? fie!
bee fore won, fie seeks.
see, fie seeks, tree.
ate... ate...
see, cirro?
(C) lordsandwich - dopey420, on 10/12/2007, -27/+150Know I will get dugg down. I feel that Kevin R has sold out. I miss the Dark tipper. Use too, he show us some cool hacks, cracks. Mostly windows and Linux stuff. Now he seams to be an apple shell/fan boy.
Now this crap. If they lose the old tech tv fan base which helped them launch this site, and there podcast? Wounder what be left?
Still watch the show but starting to get bored with it. Use to care about Kevin's opinion on stuff. Now not so much. - tfinniga, on 10/12/2007, -3/+125> Can posting random hex characters get you in trouble?!
Just encrypt it first. You know, with ROT-26 or something. Circumvention of your message would then violate the DMCA... - jimripper, on 10/12/2007, -11/+96I would like to point out that this is not a free speech issue. The First Amendment addresses GOVERNMENT regulation of your right to free expression. Private entities (such as business, e.g. DIGG) may regulate your comments any way they see fit without encroaching on your rights. That said, Digg is being pretty lame about this.
- anitab83, on 10/12/2007, -16/+94Imagine this. You're a 30 year old entrepreneur who's running a company that nets very little money but is valued in the 8 to 9 figure range. Your future is entirely determined on your financial supporters and advertisers, you have no paid subscribers and no product to sell. One day, a group of lawyers representing one of the largest industries in the world threatens to sue you and shut you down (either by threatening your ISP or your backers). What would you do?
Sure, Digg could take this to court. And Digg could probably win. But how many startups who are burning through money want to engage a multi-billion dollar industry? Digg needs to be mindful of their financiers, and their advertisers. Even if they won, engaging in a big legal battle could kill Digg. This is my guess regarding what happened ... it's logical Digg's attorneys advised Kevin and crew of the same.
I'd really rather hear it from Kevin or someone else at Digg. I'm sure Digg just wants it to go away, and wishes that they didn't have to remove the stories. - Kumaku, on 10/12/2007, -14/+89You mean this one?
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 xx xx
(I have no money to spend on lawyers) - themarq, on 10/12/2007, -7/+81It would appear that Digg has taken this C+D letter very seriously as they have been studiously deleting all references to **the number** all day (some had as many as 15000 diggs).
Interesting that I only found this thread by looking at K Rose's diggs for today, he's yet to comment but I suspect that shortly we'll see a statement from the $60 million dollar man explaining the rationale of deleting free speech content from the so-called user-driven digg site.
We're all waiting with bated breath Kevin. - AggieTales, on 10/12/2007, -2/+70Its nice to know they can probably just ignore the C&Ds and not get in trouble for it. The First Circuit Court ruled, backed by the Communication Decency Act (Sect. 230) that a site can't be held account able for something its users/commenters post.
here's proof: http://www.acsblog.org/economic-regulation-employment-federal-court-reaffirms-immunity-of-bloggers-from-suits-brought-against-commenters.html
or direct from the First Circuit Court of Appeals: http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/06-1826-01A.pdf - navaburo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+71@EmailAddress: HEY THATS MY RANDOM STRING OF HEX!
- john2kx, on 10/12/2007, -6/+7400001001
11111001
00010001
00000010
10011101
01110100
11100011
01011011
11011000
01000001
01010110
11000101
01100011
01010110
10001000
11000000
:) - trogdor282, on 10/12/2007, -4/+60How many annoying memes can we combine?
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
░09░░░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░░░░░░
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░░░░░░
░░░░░░░F9░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░11░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░02░░░░░
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░░░░░░
░░9D░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░74░░░░░░░░░
░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░░▐▌░░
░░E3░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒██▒▒▒▒▒▒▒██▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░5B░░░▐▌░░
░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒██▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒██▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░████░
░░░D8░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒██▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒██▒▒▒░░░41░░░██░░
░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒██▒▒▒████▒▒▒▒▒████▒▒▒██▒░░░░░░░░██░░
░░░56░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░░██░░
░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒████████░░
░░░░░░██▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒██████████▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░C5░░░░░
░░░░██░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░░░░
░░██░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░░░░
░░██░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░░░░
░░░░░63░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░56░░░░
░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░░░░
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██░░░░██░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
░░░░░88░░░░░░░░░██████░░░░██████░░░░░░░░░░C0░░░░░
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░ - dracostimpy, on 10/12/2007, -5/+55Digg has no original content; it's just linking to other sites that are printing that number. Digg's no more to blame for that than Google is for linking people to ripped MP3s or movie torrents. Digg is really just a giant human-driven web crawler, not unlike Googlebot. Hopefully, Google won't cave as easily as Digg, and they'll set a nice precedent if this goes to court since this DMCA argument is a load of shiat.
Also, being a DBA myself, let's not make it too easy for digg/google/etc to find and delete all recurrences of that string, so mix it up a little by throwing in some plain English, guys. Here's an example:
Digits 1,7 are zero
2,4,9 are all nine
3 is f
5,6,20 are one
8 is two
10,17 are d
11 is seven
12,19 are four
13 is e
14,26 are three
15,21,24 are five
16 is b
18 is eight
22,25 are six
23 is c
There, let's see how long it takes em to filter out that one! Get creative, diggers. - zecrose, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4809 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0.
Until they ban us all.
....................../´¯/)
....................,/¯../
.................../..../
............./´¯/'...'/´¯¯`·¸
........../'/.../..../......./¨¯
........('(...´...´.... ¯~/'...')
..........................'...../
..........''............. _.·´
..........................(
.............................. - zackkitzmiller, on 10/12/2007, -8/+51Kevin doesn't want to censor. He also doesn't want to lose Digg.
- ZeroMP, on 10/12/2007, -2/+42http://www.09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0.us/
This guy states that the numbers came to him in a dream... he wonders what they might mean.
Nice. - thomasthecat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+40My friend (digg user meamog) has this to say:
meamog: i think the internet, as a whole, is about equivalent to a 2 year old
meamog: tell it "no" and bad things happen - dattaway, on 10/12/2007, -1/+37The only way to be sure its the authentic number is to check its md5sum:
cfddca0b93558c11cd6d2a7023a544bf - obijohn, on 10/12/2007, -1/+37The decryption algorithm may be public knowledge, but that's not the same thing as "public domain". Anyway, it's not a copyright issue. The number itself isn't the issue. The DMCA is the issue, which criminalizes even the dissemination of the technique (the algorithm) used to circumvent copy protection (not copyright).
Now, a number is not an algorithm. A prosecutor would be hard pressed to win a case against you for publishing a number, and only a number, which by itself can't be used for anything except getting banned from Digg. That doesn't mean the AACS LS won't issue a DMCA notice, it just means that you probably won't get prosecuted if you don't comply.
However, publishing the algorithm WILL get you in a world of hurt. As in Full-Metal-Jacket kind of hurt.
Digg me down, ban me, I am so disgusted today I don't care anymore - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+36You know, Slashdot doesn't remove stuff without a fight, and without clearly discussing it with their members.
http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/07/05/01/1935250.shtml
What little respect I had for digg just got flushed down the toilet. - gweedo767, on 10/12/2007, -3/+37@terminaltor: fear not! I dugg down your post just as you asked!
- Diggtatorship, on 10/12/2007, -4/+37Vote for your favorite number: http://www.polldaddy.com/poll.asp?p=34916
- catalysis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+31ME FAIL ENGLISH THATS UNPOSSIBLE
- gregms, on 10/12/2007, -1/+30@themarq, I feel the same way and found out about the article from Kevin's Digg's. People were posting saying he dugg one of the AACS stories right before it was taken down so I don't know what is going on.
Kevin Rose really needs to put out some kind of statement. This whole thing is beyond ridiculous. - NSMike, on 10/12/2007, -15/+42More likely he doesn't want to pay for the lawyers that would help him categorically win the case, since everything is user-submitted, and supposedly user moderated. Guess that idea went out the window. Way to ruin digg, Rose. All I can say is you better fess up on diggnation this week.
- lordsandwich, on 10/12/2007, -2/+28That's a valid criticism, stevemax. Maybe you'll like this one better:
seer on high!
if nay won, won oh too? nay.
deceive and, for eatery, fie!
be the eigth, for once.
physics, sea. physics, tree.
physics, a teat.
see, cirro?
God, I have no life. - khyberkitsune, on 10/12/2007, -1/+26Kevin Rose is a ***** pushover. This was put out in public domain by the AACS LA themselves, which then became PUBLIC RECORD, WORD FOR WORD. That means it's no longer a trade secret, nothing is infringed, and nothing can be done to stop it. End of story. Revocation won't work because the algorithm itself has been deciphered.
Kevin Rose, get your nose out of digg and go read some law books. Then you bring back that 10,000+ digg from yesterday so we can take it to 50,000+, and declare a sound victory over the industry, which literally shot themselves in the foot by publishing the information TO THE PUBLIC. - squaredUP, on 10/12/2007, -2/+27or..
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 CX
where X = ln 1; - chrisOrbit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+24I cant stop laughing
- NSMike, on 10/12/2007, -1/+24You, sir, are a genius. It almost makes sense too.
- greenlight2001, on 10/12/2007, -1/+23Brilliant!
They should teach that in high school English classes. - Terminaltor, on 10/12/2007, -2/+24
zero nine
eff nine
one one
zero two
nine dee
seven four
eee three
five bee
dee eight
four one
five six
cee five
six three
five six
eight eight
cee zero - Futurejunior, on 10/12/2007, -1/+23on that now, I now have -2 submissions in for my user name!
- francisew, on 10/12/2007, -12/+33For everyone who is moderately confused by the HEX code being re-posted... It's the processing key for the DRM cracked on HD DVD discs.
- ophilye, on 10/12/2007, -3/+24I love it when you guys get creative...
I thought you all might like to see my shopping list...
Oranges x2
Elephants x9
18 stuffs
Ostriches x2
9 Dippers
Featherx x4
Egrets x3
5 Apples
Doritos x8
61 stuffs
56 more stuffs
Catrudays x8
6 Artichokes
Bees x 6
88 more stuffs
Carbon Copied - pbaehr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+21What planet are you calling?
- timbro1, on 10/12/2007, -10/+31STOP THE CENSORSHIP!
- picciano, on 10/12/2007, -4/+24http://09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0.justgotowned.com/
(Sorry, no really, I'm sorry. Really.) - sik0fewl, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2413,256,278,887,989,457,651,018,865,901,401,704,640
- djphatjive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+25093-911-0293743352384-156-2563568820
There it is as a phone number!!!!! - StillGaming, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20"***** yo' couch, Kevin!" *tramples HD-DVD code everywhere*
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+21What if I make that my username? Would my username become a violation of copyright? Would Digg have to purge my userid from the database?
- invader, on 10/12/2007, -4/+22> Your search - "O9 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0" - did not match any documents.
In hexadecimal, the letter "o" is not used. If you change the "O9" to "09" you will get plenty of results
edit: ConceptJunkie beat me to it - laserdog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17Someone has already registered "the number" .com, .net and .org.
Which means that the whois database is now culpable, as is any DNS server of any ISP that caches it, not to mention the Root # DNS server itself. - Technopundit, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19This Just In:
Bible scholars in Israel have just discovered The Code embedded in the second chapter of Deuteronomy. The MIAA has mailed a C&D letter to God. - EmailAddress, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18Ramzi must be very unhappy with Kevin deleting the stories that share the key.
- jrsims, on 10/12/2007, -7/+23Question though - whether the leaking of the hex code was intentional or not - didn't this event just give a huge boost to the HD-DVD format? Won't more of us buy HD-DVD technology now that it has basically been opened up?
Something to think about. - realwx, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17base64 encoded: MDkgRjkgMTEgMDIgOUQgNzQgRTMgNUIgRDggNDEgNTYgQzUgNjMgNTYgODggQzA=
-
Show 51 - 100 of 271 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is