Your love of the ad-hominen tells a great deal about both your debating skill and your intellectual capacity. Then, perhaps a little calm logic would suit your purpose better than all you pompous bombast. Ooops, there we go with the ad-hominems again. Only to the extent that neither you nor Sophocles actually managed to understand what I was saying, but instead continued to witter on repeating yourselves over and over again about something quite different. A typical get out from someone who cannot continue to argure a point. Sad really, but not, I fear, unexpected. After all, all a bullies are cowards. Well, here I must admit that I could take lessons from the masters, i.e. yourself and your acolyte, Sophocles. And that went right over your head, didn't it. I fear you still do not understand the significance of that. Your wittering on stating the blindingly obvious was what was foolish, and still is. If it makes you feel better to believe that, you go right ahead "recording methods we use in trying to decrypt the files"? You really haven't got a clue, have you? What on earth have the recording methods we use got to do with trying to decrypt a file. Do try and make at least a little bit of sense. Indeed, and I merely indicated how one could (erroneously as it turns out) deduce a certain situation from the information given. Were you and your fellow forum tyrants not so keen on point scoring and dick swinging, you could have ended that particular tangential diversion quickly and politely. Instead you started ranting like good 'uns and off we went on a roller-coaster of irrelevance. Well done old chap. If you understood as much as you evidently think you understand, you would have been able to stop the misunderstandings you see dead in their tracks with simple, clear, logic. The fact that you need to rant and be obnoxious at every turn merely shows you are trying to punch way above your weight.
Moglex I've been civil to you thus far but you're by far the rudest person posting on this thread. The truth is you don't have a clue as to what you're talking about and we all know it. So far all you've offered is a foray into semantics without miking sense of a single discipline of technology. I understand the basis of your very simplistic argument. If it can be played then it's not copy protection. My point was that even if it can be played it is copy protection however ineffective. If you're not involved in the debate about DVD Decyrpter then what the hell are you doing here besides flaming the thread? There you go again with juvenile attempts to condescend. The only flawed understanding here has been demonstrated by you. You don't know a damned thing about what you are arguing about and you were wise to back out of a chartroom debate with me. Now the gloves are off. I eat pathetic no-nothing Pea-brained morons like you for breakfast all the time, however you don't know enough to make a real debate possible. So why don't you just mosey on to the newbie threads and leave the real discussions of technology to those of us who actually understand them.
72morgan The only answer to a question I’ll ever give from now on is: Use Verbatim and Buy AnyDVD.. As my old Daddy always said, Never miss a good chance to shut up.
Moglex See what I mean? LOL Another juvenile outburst. Ad-hominems? Not likely, just drawing attention to the antics of a pompous egotist.
2oldGeek I may follow suit. LOL My good old Daddy told me not to argue with fools, they'll drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. I'm afraid that's what I've allowed moglex to do. You all have a good evening.
You weren't saying anything that isn't common knowledge to anyone that owns a DVD burner. That fact that you know it is proof of how simplistic of your thinking is. Let's have some real fun. How does a transcoder differ from and encoder? What is a physical protection? What is the difference between a hardware encoder and a software encoder and how do you get by CSS when using a hardware encoder? What is a PGC chain and how does it relate to the structure of a DVD? What is the definition of a glib no nothing mouth piece? Answer "Moglex
brobear, You clearly don't know what an ad-hominem is, as you've equally clearly used at least one. And, once again, you avoid any logical argument and resort to simple name calling. Sad. Don't put yourself down. No dragging was required. I just had to yell down the well Sophocles, A fascinating piece of logic! By your reasoning anyone who knows a basic piece of information is guilty of simplistic thinking. A truly weird position, but I doubt that you'll defend such an absurdity logically. More name calling would be my guess As to the rest: Coming up with a list of pretty elementary questions proves nothing. Even if I troubled to answer them, you would simply say I got them of the 'net (which is, come to think of it, true. I expect you did the same). The extent you and your little pal brobear will go to to avoid logical argument would be remarkable were it not so depressing.
No just you, by your lack of reasoning. Only the simple minded such as yourself who has nothing more than basic knowledge but thinks that they somehow have more were being targeted. In my line of work we call that "over inflated sense of self." You didn't answer any of my questions because you don't have the answers but I bet that you will have an explanation for that too. Maybe its something like "thou shalt not temp god." I have a problem with people who self ordain themselves as intellects without substance while trying to convince everyone else as to how smart they are and you are a prime example.
I have been following this thread for a few weeks now and just can't help to step in and lend a hand. Here are some links to help everyone involved in this debate... http://thesaurus.reference.com/ for everyone who had run out of words. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page Some very useful resources... Can't you all just agree to disagree? We are, afterall here to help...and I don't see any of that going on.
We're past agreeing and disagreeing, it's come down to personal insults by non contributors. I didn't come into this thread to exchange insults but there is a point where I will not stand by and accept them from an egotistic non contributer. I have however gone as far as I will go in this disagreement because further discourse without goals avails no one.
good call soph! I once left this forum over such nonsense, but will always remember some of the members here! the thing is it get's increasingly difficult to help people that post experiments based in error or untested theories under the guise that they are the "ultimate truth" when some of the members here watched the field progress to what it is now then someone comes along and thinks they have outsmarted the powers that be, in a month or two! all they really need to know is how to read and then who to believe that is where those like ascii,soph,arnie & brobear come in they are the most important part in the whole dynamic they have to sort the rubbish from the fact so that reading does not become misleading! I thank all for your contributions for I think those that read this thread will benefit as long as they can discern the wisdom from the bs. @ moglex I can see you've tried to read and learn seems from a very dated knowledge base of video authoring! I'd like to congratulate you on your studies! but one thing troubles me! you know not one you speak of and throw around a few technical terms so as to intimidate some of the members here,I'm guessing?? what good is to come of this! the fact is you are not just taking a pic of the video a disk cannot contain an actual image as if it is a film from a old time reel projector the disk holds bits & bytes configured and encoded your simple logic is just that flawed in it's simplicity! people have been trying to explain the flaws but you are not trying to grasp them! but feel free to pick up some terms and take them to another forum to argue about what you don't really know about! I don't under stand what your point is you speak of big dvd pirates and bit perfect copies! like this is some world of fairy tails designed around your flimsy arguments! why would you want the protection's on your dvd, are you selling porno's by any chance! because that would be more interesting than reading your post's on nothing but a tendency to stir the masses into madness! do you know what you are arguing maybe there was a point nestled in your convoluted posting's but truthfully it was painful to read what little I did your throwing terms around you obviously don't understand! you must have been told so before because all your belittling sounds as if you are replying to your own post's do we bore you?? by not posting right away to utter rubbish! I'm sorry to have brought this into the light but by now any who have read a post of your's kinda get's it! you are overly confident about your knowledge! and it seem's you enjoy! about bro bear's "bullying techniques" I don't believe he is trying to bully you just feels it's his duty to oppose such things that would represent taking a step back in the collective knowledge of the community! if you dont' understand why he is so determined to oppose you then or his role in this thread please start over @ the top of this post! g'day folks! l8
I don't think anyone should leave, you are all great assets to the site and the value of your contributions may never be known. Everyone who has posted in detail in this thread is very knowledgable about DVD authoring...there are just varying opinions or different schools of thought at work.
Sophocles Old Mowgly couldn't understand his own dictionary. His discourse was a perfect example of ad-hominem (appealing to emotions: appealing to people's emotions and prejudices instead of their ability to think). His last diatribe was merely the parroting of our words in a futile effort to anger us and improve his image, if only in his own eyes. My daddy was right about fools, even ones that ate a dictionaray. LOL Mowglex In your case I feel justified in using ad-hominem statements. You will probably be forever what you've exhibited here, a sociopahic twit (ad-hominem). Your type rarely changes. Despite my failings, I at least contribute to the knowledge base. All you wanted was an argument and that's all you've contributed. Your only claim to knowledge is an assertion you have some obscure programming skills and can use a few big words in a written discourse. Your continued baiting and argumentative behavior only lends credence to my original premise, you're being imbecilic (ad-hominem, but true). Your asinine behavior shows Sophocles is correct in his evaluation, you have an "over inflated sense of self" which you will defend no matter how low you sink (already proven). You've been unable to add any knowledge to this forum, yet you've tried to berate those who have. Sophocles asked questions of a technical nature that you've avoided answering. Given enough time, you may no doubt come up with a few answers; not to give any reasonable answer, but to try to prove to yourself and others you can. It's obvious you know nothing about encryption and decryption, other than what is in the dictionary (ad-hominem). You've had plenty of time to google around for answers, but it will be too late to improve your eroded image. Your persona has cracked, your academic air of superiority has vanished and you're showing the argumentative traits of an adolescent (true, but ad-hominem). Unfortunate for you mowglex, you're not the only one who was allowed to read a dictionary.
@LOCO You missed my pun. I meant that you were the only one who wasn't LOCO (Crazy) We all know your're a great asset. I'm on your side. I'll try to be more specific in the future.
[bold]Back on topic:[/bold] Apologies to any forum members who have been trying to glean useful info on encryption and decryption. The thread was about copyright removal. Among other things, that was covered. A brief summary consists of how the encryption functions and our findings. There is the encryption built into the system, CSS. Originally, all decryption needed to be was DeCSS. The movie industry, though somewhat misguided, is not without intelligent people. Since Pandora's Box had already been opened where CSS was concerned, they started adding structural encryption to target the software based systems doing the decryption. That leads to the situation where some deduced ISO files could be used to subvert the encryption better than the file mode. Further research (added to by 2oldgeek) showed that encryption is present in both the ISO format and File format. Of interest to the people interested in decryption are the more notable apps being used. AnyDVD (good retail driver type decryption tool), DVDFab Decrypter (good freeware ripper style decrypter), DVD Decrypter (freeware and once the best ripper type decrypter available), and DVD Shrink (the best freeware transcoder available) are among the best tools available. Just a quick note on DVD Shrink for those not familiar with this aspect of the app, it is able to make minor repairs to file structure (or allow for them) so the user can go ahead and do a successful transcode where other programs would error out. For editing encrypted files, VobBlanker is handy. For newer encryption systems such as Arccos and Puppetlock (structural encryption) DVD Decrypter needs the PSL2 files as a guide. Both DVD Decrypter and DVD Shrink suffer from losing support, the decryption software continues to become more obsolete due to the movie industry adding newer and heavier encryption strategies. For the time being we've learned that the encryption is pervasive in both ISO and File formats. The best success is using known good software and keeping the decryption software updated as much as possible. For those who like to edit, the forums supply good info on "how to" for different techniques. As mentioned, DVD Decrypter was weakened, but is still in the game. Likewise, DVD Shrink lost support, but it is still one of the heavy hitters. As for "The Fog", with the Arccoss and Puppetlock encryption, it is one of the more difficult DVDs, but it is doable. As pointed out here (and later agreed to by 2oldgeek) ISO and File mode, both, can contain encryption and a person can succeed or fail using either or both. So far, without editing, different software combinations do make a difference as pointed out. Shrink being more forgiving does slightly better with different decryption tools. On this particular movie, I found the latest version of DVDFab Decrypter, to have the most usable rip with more transcoding and encoding software. Hopefully, I've summed this up correctly and gotten back on topic. Anyone wanting to make additions and/or corrections, feel free to do so.
I am disinclined to continue the rather daft spat that has taken place over the past few days. I don't think anyone aquitted themselves particularly well with silly, condescending and patronising wind-ups flying around and getting in the way of sensible discussion. For my part in this, I appologise, although I deny that any of this was done in an attempt to make myself 'look good'. Since I stated on several occasions that I'm no great (or even minor) expert on DVDD, I'm not sure how I was trying to improve my image (self or otherwise) by serially admitting that. Fortunately, this is just one thread in hundreds, and I doubt that more many people have bothered to follow the invective, so I suppose no long term harm has been done. My epithet for the latter half of this thread would be: "When wind-up merchants collide".
