Hopefully they allow pods to be federated between self-hosted and CDN.
Given that TBL sold out the Web standards process to rubber-stamp a DRM API, I’d need a lot of convincing before I entrusted my personal data to something he created. Having Schneier on board is an encouraging sign, however.
I disagree that was selling out, and it might have been the best choice in that situation.
DRM on the internet was already happening using things like Silverlight, and it was showing no signs of stopping anytime soon.
By standardizing DRM onto one implementation it kept the industry fro fracturing into multiple conflicting solutions, and allowed browser vendors to build it in.
Standardizing DRM even brought previously unavailable content to more platforms.
TL;DR: DRM is bad, but by standardizing it the damage it causes was reduced.
That is a misconception, because only the EME was standardised, not the CDMs as well. Take Widevine as an example - it uses the EME standard, but is only available for certain platforms, and to certain vendors.
For an example of how this works in reality: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/04/03/googles_widevine_drm/
There is no upside to having a standardised interface to DRM, only downsides. (Actually there might be one; I’ve been told that EME has better accessibility affordances than its predecessors.)
It might have been, but I doubt it. It’s the first standard that was pushed through by W3C despite such strong objections. For me, it broke the standards setting method that W3C had done and also introduced non-open standards.
I’m not sure it’s better than silver light. I do know that if the best one can say is “maybe it was the best we could do,” then that’s rough. But to me, it seems not accurate as looking through the discussion and deliberation there were many other options that weren’t explored or tested. We do know that this is the best that lots of huge tech company lobbyists supported.