DRM means authenticating through a server (someplace), correct?

DMCA defines a "technological measure which limits access" (what we informally refer to as "DRM") in 1201(a)(3)(b) as

a technological measure “effectively controls access to a work” if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work.

Authenticating through a server is one way to implement DRM, but there are many other methods, where DMCA is every bit as applicable.

the DMCA is a thing... but can they do anything if they don't know about you copying/transcoding files to your phone or tablet or whatever?

Generally no, and especially with offline DRM schemes like what DVDs use, the copyright holder can't detect when you read the DVD, so right, you won't get caught. But of course the worst part of DMCA is not that it just prohibits doing things, but prohibits trafficking in tools for doing things. So the software for working with DVD DRM is illegal to create, distribute, sell, etc which means I-know-nothing-about-computers grandma would have to go off the mainstream.

If grandma is a punk rock computer user, no problem. But most people these days apparently want to go to a centralized authority (probably within their own legal jurisdiction) and just click to install things, and any centralized authority is going to be at least somewhat vulnerable to trafficking charges. Or if they solve that problem by being outside US jurisdiction, they might have payment processing issues.

Again, you're not wrong that you can do these things with DVDs (I see how being able to watch them on an unconnected-to-internet bus definitely helps, compared to proprietary streaming) but there are barriers keeping it from being a general solution for everyone. Media without DRM lacks this problem.

You wish it was that benign. This will be used to control which businesses succeed and which fail. The fact that none of the attorneys general have launched a lawsuit against this states that this is being condoned by the government.

And of course it is being condoned by the government. Some admin schlub somewhere probably was probably the progenitor of the idea.

Let's say we make every endeavour happen without regard to genitalia. Under that assumption, let's take a look at sports:

Everyone can play, but only people with a penis happen to ever win. Odd that.

Ok, now women would like to have competitions, but a male entering their competitions ruins the fun for everyone.

How to deal?

I am not discriminating against trans folks when I say they should not be competing in women's sports. I am supporting women. Trans male-to-female have had the advantage of testosterone during puberty. I am sorry, but if there is ANY doubt about your gender, you have to compete in the open class, which is dominated by males.

Vegetation is NOTfungible. Not all vegetation is the same. Time and location matter a lot.

I gotta admit, I am suspicious of this claim. Do you mean to say that people who were living sustainably off the land are better off now that they are participating in our economic system and paying for food?

I would say that they were enslaved.

Do you recall how Easter Island used to have forests? Notice how those forests no longer exist? That is the same thing that is going to happen to the entire planet. In a thousand years, this planet will likely be hostile to ALL multicellular life.

And THAT is exactly how you know that your government does not work for you, but for businesses. Fucking thieves.

I have seen green firetrucks in Arizona, specifically Tucson. More of a yellow-green, but green nevertheless.

(I didn't read the comment you were replying to, sorry)

Irrelevant. "For the children" is the cry of all censors. And it appears to be very effective. There are enough stupid people to ensure that such silliness actually works. (for various definitions of 'works')

Laws will be passed to keep the turbulence to a minimum. That will work as well as declaring Pi to be exactly 3 as Indiana did one year.

The upcoming collapse is easy to see. The problem is that the people in control can't see it because they are blinded by what they want.

LOL. The most intense surveillance society ever conceived is active and constantly looking for people who could contest power. The wealthy will be riding this control until the entire country has been completely destroyed. And that is how this will end because greedy and arrogant people do not do engineering.

There are over 100 million people within America that are scheduled to be starved to death. I really don't think construction and plumbing will be much of a concern until that scenario finishes playing out.

DVDs use DRM? Then, how do they work on an offline DVD player?

Yes, they use DRM. It's described here .. though the rest of your post suggests you already knew the basics.

And yes, you can play, transcode, backup, etc the data. You're right about that. But unfortunately, you're also right about this:

They fall under the DMCA, that's it.

And that's what causes many of the activities you describe, to be illegal unless you get authorization from the copyright holder.

I point this out not because I'm some kind of Law Zealot, but because many people have inhibitions about violating the law, and while it's extremely unlikely you'll get caught, it nevertheless does come with some slight risk.

Offering DVDs as an example of "they can't take it away," like I said, is technically correct, but DVDs are nevertheless a poor example, since so many routine tasks involving them, are illegal. Illegality tends to be a barrier to mainstream acceptance, and hampers utility in other ways.

Matroska files would be a better, more consumer-friendly example of "they can't take it away", since working with them doesn't come with as many legal difficulties (since there's no DRM, so DMCA doesn't apply).

Soooo, you want people to take their guns and go to DC? I have seen no ICE agents in my neighborhoods, so what good would patrolling be here?

Honestly, it sounds like you are mocking people who stand up for 2A and not shooting anyone while this shit goes down. Tell me, who are they to shoot? Cops? National Guard? Politicians?

Get your shit straight before you mock others. Or, just stop listening to propaganda.

Written communication is so hard to decipher.

Did you notice the quotes that I put around the "why" question? The reason they are there is because that is the simplest question possible that the majority of people will respond to. And if you can't answer that reasonably, your ideas will go nowhere.

That actual question is from an extremely limited point of view and is not a question I would directly ask myself.

There is some Truth to the question. "Why should I help others when others are not helping me?"

But ultimately, Society is a group of people who should be looking out for each other; otherwise, it is not a society, it is an exploitation scheme. Thanks for the Scrooge reference. It merely means you did not understand... but that is not a huge problem. Written words are hard to fully understand because there is no back-and-forth like a regular discussion which can clarify certain things.

LOL, apparently, we are not from the same planet. You see Centrism. I see a lot of lies and exploitation. We are not the same.