Encryption

[joblo]

What A3SA/Pearl TV is doing is very sketchy.

In more ways than one...

[foxbat121]

https://cordcuttersnews.com/the-fcc-wil ... -3-0-only/

[SpiceWare]

https://cordcuttersnews.com/the-fcc-wil ... -3-0-only/

I replied to the FCC's tweet about this with a few "unable to play channel" pictures of my TV and how that could impact hurricane coverage here in Houston.

https://x.com/SpiceWare/status/1963662415150637377

[jasonl]

https://cordcuttersnews.com/the-fcc-wil ... -3-0-only/

That post is bullshit and Luke Bouma should be embarrassed. Absolutely nothing changed because of the FCC's public notice. It was literally just a restatement of all the policies that are currently in place, conveniently assembled into a single document. There is enough misinformation coming from Pearl and others on that side of things, no need to exacerbate things by posting incorrect, sensational headlines.

[gtb]

https://cordcuttersnews.com/the-fcc-wil ... -3-0-only/

That post is bullshit and Luke Bouma should be embarrassed. Absolutely nothing changed because of the FCC's public notice. It was literally just a restatement of all the policies that are currently in place, conveniently assembled into a single document. There is enough misinformation coming from Pearl and others on that side of things, no need to exacerbate things by posting incorrect, sensational headlines.

The encrapification of tech "news" has been ongoing for a while now, and page views (using misleading headlines and content) is the only way some of those sites pay the "bills". That some then take those headlines and re-post on other social media expressing outrage which drives even more page views is an ugly cycle feeding the continued race to the bottom. I suspect Luke got exactly what he wanted (revenue). I long ago stopped reading any CCN content.

[RickD_99]

https://cordcuttersnews.com/the-fcc-wil ... -3-0-only/

That post is bullshit and Luke Bouma should be embarrassed. Absolutely nothing changed because of the FCC's public notice. It was literally just a restatement of all the policies that are currently in place, conveniently assembled into a single document. There is enough misinformation coming from Pearl and others on that side of things, no need to exacerbate things by posting incorrect, sensational headlines.

Why anyone listens to this clown on YouTube is beyond me. Lon and Tyler are Edward R. Murrow in comparison to that doofus…

[theseer2]

https://cordcuttersnews.com/the-fcc-wil ... -3-0-only/

That post is bullshit and Luke Bouma should be embarrassed. Absolutely nothing changed because of the FCC's public notice. It was literally just a restatement of all the policies that are currently in place, conveniently assembled into a single document. There is enough misinformation coming from Pearl and others on that side of things, no need to exacerbate things by posting incorrect, sensational headlines.

His fake news site. Most of it is copy anad paste. Im not pro FCC in the current form, but his bias affects his reporting. Most of his articles are cut and paste with youtube like click baits

[howardc1243]

Steady as she goes... https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-25-789A1.pdf

looks like that roadhazard is looking for a wreck.

anyone been stockpiling movies or tv progs?

[mbirk1951]

[removed by moderator - see forum rules] will SD design a new ATSC 3.0 DRM compliant tuner? Or will broadcast TV just become mostly obsolete. I mainly only need broadcast TV for local news, weather and the occasional football game. Seems like local news is struggling to stay solvent and more sports are going to internet streaming. Maybe in a couple of years I won't really need a way to record broadcast TV. I have really enjoyed my SD tuners for several years now and will likely continue to use them as long as possible.

[bandit5731]

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/1091786857944/1 another group against forced transition.

[NedS]

will SD design a new ATSC 3.0 DRM compliant tuner?

The existing ATSC 3.0 hardware we make is already compliant. It's the software/playback side that decrypts DRM, so there's nothing to change on the hardware side.

[DrSmith]

will SD design a new ATSC 3.0 DRM compliant tuner?

The existing ATSC 3.0 hardware we make is already compliant. It's the software/playback side that decrypts DRM, so there's nothing to change on the hardware side.

Unless SD's Huawei chip use is not allowed. Yes, yes, the chip, the usage, the company are not part of the ban, technically. And technically SD's Flex 4k is just one rubber stamp away from DRM approval. But we've seen that Pearl/A3SA do not play by reasonable rules.

[NedS]

Unless SD's Huawei chip use is not allowed. Yes, yes, the chip, the usage, the company are not part of the ban, technically. And technically SD's Flex 4k is just one rubber stamp away from DRM approval. But we've seen that Pearl/A3SA do not play by reasonable rules.

No.

There's no "technically". There is no speculation to this. There is no bending the rules here. The SoC is not a factor, period.

The actual engineers involved at the A3SA are actually nice people and fully understand this. There's literally an A3SA approved app that decrypts ATSC 3.0 DRM from HDHomeRun hardware already. It's just only approved for TV stations for commercial use, for whatever platform they use for viewing/monitoring.

Only the representatives for Pearl has ever claimed the SoC was an issue. It's not. It never has been. It never will be. If we made different hardware with a different SoC, and that new box and an old box both captured the ATSC 3.0 DRM data, it would be the same data. The physical HDHomeRun box is about as passive as possible in this whole process.

[Cabal]

The actual engineers involved at the A3SA are actually nice people and fully understand this. There's literally an A3SA approved app that decrypts ATSC 3.0 DRM from HDHomeRun hardware already. It's just only approved for TV stations for commercial use, for whatever platform they use for viewing/monitoring.

[mbirk1951]

will SD design a new ATSC 3.0 DRM compliant tuner?

The existing ATSC 3.0 hardware we make is already compliant. It's the software/playback side that decrypts DRM, so there's nothing to change on the hardware side.

Apparently, you believe that DRM authorization for the client software will be approved someday. I hope you are right After more than two years of no real progress, all I see are discussions about the problems that need to be cleared. Any way we seem to have at least two more years before ASTC 1.0 could start to be turned off.