Discussing "licensing" in a thread about coffee. Fuck.
This is not what the future was supposed to be about. The future was supposed to bring us infinite possibilities through the means of technology. It was meant to be awesome.
It was not meant to be artificially limited through the means of technology which could have been used to make our lives better instead.
A big ah hah moment for me was realizing that money is a representation of inefficiency. So for example, if everyone had a means of growing their own food, generating their own electricity, taking care of their own health, and had unlimited access to information, we wouldn't need to buy things or pay for services. A Mr. Fusion and a replicator would be all we needed.
That’s probably the real reason they don’t use money on Star Trek. Not so much because they eliminated scarcity (which they obviously did, with numerous planets to choose from) but because giving everyone the basic means to sustain themselves was such a small fraction of the economy that it became dehumanizing to force people to work so much when society could provide for all within the percentage of a rounding error.
This concept’s relevance for coffee makers: what’s a coffee maker without coffee? Anyone can brew coffee by pouring hot water through a sock (as it’s done in much of the developing world) and I can say from experience that it’s both more convenient and can even make a better cup. So the key is the coffee, not the machine. It’s not really surprising that Keurig wants to cement itself as a middleman, and since coffee is everywhere, it was probably inevitable that they’d turn to a DRM solution.
Hydroponics, fabless photovoltaics and big data medicine are going to be what take us into the future, not some kitchen gismo. In fact, the more I witness “progress” in my lifetime, the more I see that the really revolutionary stuff like the internet is generally free and shared by all. Otherwise it just makes some guy rich. I want to be rich too, but I’ve spent half my life chasing a goal that wouldn’t even be necessary if I was off the grid and could just get left the heck alone.
"Because money" is sufficient justification for actions in business that would otherwise be classified as sociopathic. This is fairly light in the grand scheme of things.
The flaw is thinking that technology alone can help people. If you created a machine that magically makes everyone the equivalent of a billionaire, but don't fix an imbalance of power - that certain people are allowed to take as much as they want from anyone with less power and privilege - then you have helped nobody.
We went wrong when we discouraged hackers and competitors from doing this kind of thing. If this wasn't encouraged by government, products like the Keurig 2.0 would be broken quickly and soon after vanish. DRM should not be a viable business model. You want to prosecute copyright infringers, fine, that's one thing, but if you're attacking people who break DRM systems, that's quite another.
I think it's important to at least acknowledge the desire a "razor/razorblades" device manufacturer has for maintaining the quality of their brand by controlling to some extent the user experiences that are possible with their tool. To me, this seems similar to Sony and Nintendo wanting the right to certify titles that run on their consoles. You can argue about whether removing freedom from the user is worth the trade for a reliable user experience, and you can argue about the right place to draw the quality line, but they're trying to guarantee a certain minimum level of user experience by doing this.
If Keurig coffee was somehow astoundingly good out of their machine, with their pods, would we have less of a problem with what they are doing?
What Keurig is doing also doesn't prevent another manufacturer from competing with an unencumbered alternative. Shouldn't we expect such a system to compete in the marketplace on its merits?
Fantastic line of discussion! Glad you're bringing it up.
We went wrong when we said, "We can have infinite possibilities, but only through >ME<."
And then we cemented the deal when we went along with the "guy" who said, "You can only have infinite possibilities through >ME<."
And we let it get worse when we rationalize the Keurig with bullshit like "Having a pot of coffee around is unsafe because of the burner, etc."
Technology is a stand-in for relationships - what you would do for someone if you were there, but conveniently you've duplicated yourself via machine. We went wrong when we said, "Well, if I was there, I would prevent you from having coffee from a convenient machine." In reality you wouldn't - you would share as much as possible. However, when we replace ourselves with machines designed by greedy committees, we write ourselves out of the equation.
My future is not artifically limited through the means of technology. I use my trusty moka pot for decent coffee and instant when I'm on the run (I have no shame).
One way to look at the razors and blades business model that Keurig is doing here is like so:
1. The consumer purphases product A (here the coffee maker) on the normal consumer market we're all familiar with.
2. Doing so forces the consumer to purchase product B (here K-cups) on a different market.
Keurig's goal is to control the second market. By making having all the market power, they can jack up prices to the consumer's detriment.
The reason you see companies like this invoking the DMCA or using DRM is because they have no actual competitive advantage in that second market. They are at a disadvantage because they burned money selling product A at a loss to get people into their market.
Loss-leader market models don't HAVE to abuse customers. We're just not comfortable with licensing vs ownership arrangements.
Often market forces put us here. Locked, subsidized cell phones with contracts or DRM printers are sold to get people into the market; they wouldn't buy it at full rate.
I don't want to be part of that deal so I buy the unlocked cell phone and DRM-free coffee machine. The alternative is very nearly theft.
I don't understand why it's a different market. Do you mean that cartridges are just intrinsically different from the actual machine using the cartridges? This is identical to printers, so would you say the market for ink cartridges is different than the market for printers? On a literal level I suppose this is correct, but I wouldn't consider pens and pen ink to be different markets... Maybe I haven't thought it through enough.
This video took me on a little YouTube adventure which led me to this site[1] giving away a little thing to clip onto your K2.0 machine for a nicer looking bypass. I don't have a K2.0 machine so I can't verify that it works. But it appears to be free so what have you got to lose?
I applaud the fact that they don't seem worried about the Digital Millennium Copyright Act that makes it illegal to create devices that bypass DRM. DMCA is supposed to apply only to protecting copyrighted works, but prosecutors and lawyers in general try to extend the laws in all sort of crafty ways, and usually companies are too fearful to try anything proactive.
I paid $11 for my drip coffee maker, in the local branch of a national chain grocery. I've had it for two years. It makes one to twelve cups of any kind of coffee you care to put in there, from $5 store brand to dont-even-ask café whose beans were grown on a free-trade farm in Guatemala under the supervision of the executive committee of Juan Valdez' estate's charitable trust and staffed by former independent coffee growing peasants who play guitar at night and wear neckerchiefs, and irrigated with water collected from jaguar kittens kept at a constant but humane level of annoyance.
Yeah, I'm gradually coming around to an RMS-y way of thinking – having to tape small bits of an old K-cup onto my Keurig 2.0 is DRM bullshit that I have no room for in my life. Fuck them.
Some people will use the new Keurig and its DRMed cups because it provides them with enough value. I will completely bypass this nonsense and make a DRM-free cup of dirt cheap coffee that stimulates my senses, as outlined in another comment. I suggest that you do the same.
I paid 12 dollars for a cheap coffee press from IKEA. It doesn't ask any questions about the quality of the coffee or where its from. All it asks for is hot water and coffee.
It may take up more time to prepare and clean, but that's an opportunity cost for good coffee every morning.
Well not buying a 2.0 machine. My 1.0 machine has been doing fine for years but I do not plan to buy a 2.0 I thought there were other k-cup capable machines, surely if the patent went out on the first cups there cannot be one on the actual machine? Why wouldn't someone else step into this market.
The advertising practically writes itself, works with all k-cups, the "universal k-cup koffee maker"
Its not the best coffee, but its fast and good enough. I have a press which is good for coffee; also awesome for making ginger tea; and a Bonavita for when friends are here and a pot will work.
Fortunately with 1.0 machines the refillable works fine and EkoBrew makes a very simple and great refillable
Keurigs are not for individuals, they are meant for workplaces where people like different flavors of coffee and it's impractical to have someone manage the coffee pot.
It's an amusing video, but note that that same barcode is also what provides coffee/tea-specific brewing parameters to the machine. Using the same barcode for all cups breaks that. (Using a barcode from one coffee on another seems unlikely to seriously affect the results, though.)
This has happened multiple times to me, today, all from SME. So many things in life require scissors, tape, and hacks to qualify for "decent" to me now.
I have owned two Nespresso machines. They were both great for about 8 months. Then no matter how much I 'cleansed' them they made terrible tasting coffee. You can never get the insides completely clean. I suspect the Keurig has a similar problem. I'm now back to my ceramic filter cone (one-time $20 cost) and the coffee has never tasted better.
That's a really nice hack, I fear though that the next generation of "broken by design" consumer electronics devices will make use of much more sophisticated DRM technologies to make sure you only use them as intended by the manufacturer.
An example is the German startup Bonaverde (http://www.bonaverde.com), which manufactures a coffee machine that not only grinds but also roasts your coffee beans. To make sure that you use only their certified (and pricey) coffee beans they include an RFID chip with each package that you have to scan in order to start the brewing process. No tag, no coffee.
There is also a Gizmodo article that nicely sums up the Bonaverde story:
Not siding with Keurig, but just out of curiosity, how would you to create a DRM scheme that can't be bypassed with this replay attack? Apparently [0] the DRM works by shining a light on an ink marking and registering the wavelength of the light reflected back.
I figure one simple scheme would be to 'burn' the key after it is read. i.e. physically disable the DRM ink by heat/perforation/other ink, so that once used, the signature ink cannot be reused. Curious what other HN-ers would come up with. And hoping Keurig doesn't get any ideas from this. ;)
They could have used thermo-sensitive ink (using same technology that fax paper used some time ago), on a hot cup it would have automatically destroyed itself. However, they very likely don't care about the replay hack.
The authentication scheme is there to prevent mass-manufacturing counterfeit cups. Hipsters who modify devices are below noise level on their bottom line (them bragging about sticking it to the Man is free advertisement for the brand so even if there were a loss on a machine it's hard to tell if there is a net loss or profit).
Cut power to the heat source/declaw the perforator/plug up the ink jet. I have physical access, after all.
Keurig is in the position that they can attach a number to each one of their coffee cups, and the machine will refuse to brew if the number doesn't prove the cup is authentic. If they give all the cups the same number, as they apparently have chosen here, than all anyone has to do is present that number again, and voila, the coffeemaker will execute whatever cup they feed it.
Maybe they get smart and give each and every cup a different password. Of course the machines have to recognize these passwords, so they have to start with a known list of length N, where N is the total number coffee cups they ever expect to sell for this line of machines. They put all these passwords through their favorite one-way function, stuff the hashes in a newline-delimited text file, and hope it fits in a few gigabytes. Now once the machine encounters a matching password, it brews one cup, but "crosses off" that password and won't brew for it again.
Approaching this from the perspective of someone who drinks perhaps 250 mL of coffee per year, I am utterly mystified that the commodity coffee beverage product can still support so many niche businesses.
In this very discussion, I have seen people describe the way they make their own coffee, and it is almost identical to the way U.S.A.-C.S.A. civil war soldiers made theirs in camp. And I have seen people describe their heavily-modded robotic coffee makers, using consumables pre-processed in bulk by industrial-scale machinery to provide a more consistent product.
And this makes me think that Keurig is not just pissing into the wind, but directing their little stream against a waterfall. The coffee market is huge, and more ancient by far than most other product markets. It is also thoroughly commoditized. There is simply no way for any company to enjoy pricing power in it without an improbably vast cartel or some strictly policed patents and trademarks.
Why should the collective society of coffee-drinkers indulge Keurig's attempt to achieve economic profits (positive returns when considering opportunity cost) by allowing them to differentiate their sub-market to the point where they enjoy pricing power in it? Is their coffee that much better than all available alternatives? I have similar questions about Starbucks. How do they manage to charge more than the basic commodity price?
It almost seems as though the coffee itself is not the whole product, but it also includes the ritual and ceremony of preparing it. It also looks quite a bit like the market for wines and beers, where the price that the market will bear is determined mostly by the printing on the label.
Given those assumptions, my analysis is that Keurig is approaching their problem from the worst possible angle. Inserting technical countermeasures into the hardware will never work (as repeatedly demonstrated by pwn-your-own-device hackers). They should instead pour that cash into advertising and reward-based psychology. Institute some form of intermittent reward system for using genuine, trademark-branded consumables.
You cannot ever employ enough clever engineers to defeat the legion of people with physical possession of the item and a desire to make it do what its owner desires, instead of obeying its pre-programmed manufacturer directives. Annoying your customers simply does not add value to your product.
I love how such a simple solution can bypass a DRM scheme that Keurig probably invested considerable time and effort into producing. In some cases DRM is warranted, but for a coffee machine, it is just plain ridiculous and anticompetitive to have DRM to block out competitor coffee pods when history has proven that printer manufacturers like HP have been trying and consistently failing to do this for years now.
[+] [-] mwti|11 years ago|reply
http://i.imgur.com/1wWxu37.jpg
With this I can customize the temperature and use PWM on the pump to adjust pressure/flow. :D
If I had to use that 2.0 model I'd just lobotomize it right out of the box.
[+] [-] josteink|11 years ago|reply
This is not what the future was supposed to be about. The future was supposed to bring us infinite possibilities through the means of technology. It was meant to be awesome.
It was not meant to be artificially limited through the means of technology which could have been used to make our lives better instead.
Where did we go wrong?
[+] [-] zackmorris|11 years ago|reply
That’s probably the real reason they don’t use money on Star Trek. Not so much because they eliminated scarcity (which they obviously did, with numerous planets to choose from) but because giving everyone the basic means to sustain themselves was such a small fraction of the economy that it became dehumanizing to force people to work so much when society could provide for all within the percentage of a rounding error.
This concept’s relevance for coffee makers: what’s a coffee maker without coffee? Anyone can brew coffee by pouring hot water through a sock (as it’s done in much of the developing world) and I can say from experience that it’s both more convenient and can even make a better cup. So the key is the coffee, not the machine. It’s not really surprising that Keurig wants to cement itself as a middleman, and since coffee is everywhere, it was probably inevitable that they’d turn to a DRM solution.
Hydroponics, fabless photovoltaics and big data medicine are going to be what take us into the future, not some kitchen gismo. In fact, the more I witness “progress” in my lifetime, the more I see that the really revolutionary stuff like the internet is generally free and shared by all. Otherwise it just makes some guy rich. I want to be rich too, but I’ve spent half my life chasing a goal that wouldn’t even be necessary if I was off the grid and could just get left the heck alone.
[+] [-] forgottenpass|11 years ago|reply
"Because money" is sufficient justification for actions in business that would otherwise be classified as sociopathic. This is fairly light in the grand scheme of things.
[+] [-] DanBC|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] protonfish|11 years ago|reply
We first must fix the problem of authority.
[+] [-] ultramancool|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dhm|11 years ago|reply
If Keurig coffee was somehow astoundingly good out of their machine, with their pods, would we have less of a problem with what they are doing?
What Keurig is doing also doesn't prevent another manufacturer from competing with an unencumbered alternative. Shouldn't we expect such a system to compete in the marketplace on its merits?
[+] [-] chillingeffect|11 years ago|reply
Fantastic line of discussion! Glad you're bringing it up.
We went wrong when we said, "We can have infinite possibilities, but only through >ME<."
And then we cemented the deal when we went along with the "guy" who said, "You can only have infinite possibilities through >ME<."
And we let it get worse when we rationalize the Keurig with bullshit like "Having a pot of coffee around is unsafe because of the burner, etc."
Technology is a stand-in for relationships - what you would do for someone if you were there, but conveniently you've duplicated yourself via machine. We went wrong when we said, "Well, if I was there, I would prevent you from having coffee from a convenient machine." In reality you wouldn't - you would share as much as possible. However, when we replace ourselves with machines designed by greedy committees, we write ourselves out of the equation.
[+] [-] arcosdev|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] keithpeter|11 years ago|reply
Seriously: analogue for analogue things folks.
[+] [-] squeaky-clean|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] digi_owl|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] smackfu|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] valleyer|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] icebraining|11 years ago|reply
Had unreasonable expectations?
[+] [-] aaronem|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] munificent|11 years ago|reply
1. The consumer purphases product A (here the coffee maker) on the normal consumer market we're all familiar with.
2. Doing so forces the consumer to purchase product B (here K-cups) on a different market.
Keurig's goal is to control the second market. By making having all the market power, they can jack up prices to the consumer's detriment.
The reason you see companies like this invoking the DMCA or using DRM is because they have no actual competitive advantage in that second market. They are at a disadvantage because they burned money selling product A at a loss to get people into their market.
[+] [-] Jaecen|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] abandonliberty|11 years ago|reply
Often market forces put us here. Locked, subsidized cell phones with contracts or DRM printers are sold to get people into the market; they wouldn't buy it at full rate.
I don't want to be part of that deal so I buy the unlocked cell phone and DRM-free coffee machine. The alternative is very nearly theft.
[+] [-] arthurcolle|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jack-r-abbit|11 years ago|reply
[1] https://www.gourmet-coffee.com/Keurig-DRM-Freedom-Clip.html
[+] [-] shutupalready|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] snarfy|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] a3n|11 years ago|reply
It has never complained to me about anything.
[+] [-] parennoob|11 years ago|reply
Some people will use the new Keurig and its DRMed cups because it provides them with enough value. I will completely bypass this nonsense and make a DRM-free cup of dirt cheap coffee that stimulates my senses, as outlined in another comment. I suggest that you do the same.
[+] [-] yc1010|11 years ago|reply
Costs about 20-30$ and makes great coffee A simple yet effective solution to my coffee needs :)
[+] [-] thrillgore|11 years ago|reply
It may take up more time to prepare and clean, but that's an opportunity cost for good coffee every morning.
[+] [-] Shivetya|11 years ago|reply
The advertising practically writes itself, works with all k-cups, the "universal k-cup koffee maker"
Its not the best coffee, but its fast and good enough. I have a press which is good for coffee; also awesome for making ginger tea; and a Bonavita for when friends are here and a pot will work.
Fortunately with 1.0 machines the refillable works fine and EkoBrew makes a very simple and great refillable
[+] [-] esaym|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] foobarian|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|11 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] tcfunk|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] intopieces|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JoshTriplett|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] codemac|11 years ago|reply
> This video contains content from SME.
https://i.imgur.com/4wlnL22.png
This has happened multiple times to me, today, all from SME. So many things in life require scissors, tape, and hacks to qualify for "decent" to me now.
[+] [-] qsymmachus|11 years ago|reply
1. Bring water to boil in a pot
2. Add 2 tbsp ground coffee per cup of water
3. Kill the heat, cover for 5 mins
4. Pour into cup through fine colander or cheese cloth
Seriously it's delicious and you already have the tools you need in your kitchen.
[+] [-] jrockway|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nickbauman|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ThePhysicist|11 years ago|reply
An example is the German startup Bonaverde (http://www.bonaverde.com), which manufactures a coffee machine that not only grinds but also roasts your coffee beans. To make sure that you use only their certified (and pricey) coffee beans they include an RFID chip with each package that you have to scan in order to start the brewing process. No tag, no coffee.
There is also a Gizmodo article that nicely sums up the Bonaverde story:
http://gizmodo.com/kickstarter-project-finds-exciting-new-wa...
[+] [-] hw|11 years ago|reply
I have a feeling if it's successful, it's going to give Keurig some headaches.
[+] [-] adityasankar|11 years ago|reply
I figure one simple scheme would be to 'burn' the key after it is read. i.e. physically disable the DRM ink by heat/perforation/other ink, so that once used, the signature ink cannot be reused. Curious what other HN-ers would come up with. And hoping Keurig doesn't get any ideas from this. ;)
[0] http://www.theverge.com/2014/6/30/5857030/keurig-digital-rig...
[+] [-] pandaman|11 years ago|reply
The authentication scheme is there to prevent mass-manufacturing counterfeit cups. Hipsters who modify devices are below noise level on their bottom line (them bragging about sticking it to the Man is free advertisement for the brand so even if there were a loss on a machine it's hard to tell if there is a net loss or profit).
[+] [-] underpantsgnome|11 years ago|reply
Cut power to the heat source/declaw the perforator/plug up the ink jet. I have physical access, after all.
Keurig is in the position that they can attach a number to each one of their coffee cups, and the machine will refuse to brew if the number doesn't prove the cup is authentic. If they give all the cups the same number, as they apparently have chosen here, than all anyone has to do is present that number again, and voila, the coffeemaker will execute whatever cup they feed it.
Maybe they get smart and give each and every cup a different password. Of course the machines have to recognize these passwords, so they have to start with a known list of length N, where N is the total number coffee cups they ever expect to sell for this line of machines. They put all these passwords through their favorite one-way function, stuff the hashes in a newline-delimited text file, and hope it fits in a few gigabytes. Now once the machine encounters a matching password, it brews one cup, but "crosses off" that password and won't brew for it again.
[+] [-] DanBC|11 years ago|reply
A laser would burn part of a strip for each credit used.
http://technologyandarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2011/05/how-bt-p...
(There must be better descriptions of them out there).
[+] [-] shmerl|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] programminggeek|11 years ago|reply
Also, Aeropress doesn't have all that not so eco friendly waste that Keurig's K-Cups have.
There is no DRM on Aeropress.
[+] [-] mkremer90|11 years ago|reply
http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2014/Dec/37
[+] [-] logfromblammo|11 years ago|reply
In this very discussion, I have seen people describe the way they make their own coffee, and it is almost identical to the way U.S.A.-C.S.A. civil war soldiers made theirs in camp. And I have seen people describe their heavily-modded robotic coffee makers, using consumables pre-processed in bulk by industrial-scale machinery to provide a more consistent product.
And this makes me think that Keurig is not just pissing into the wind, but directing their little stream against a waterfall. The coffee market is huge, and more ancient by far than most other product markets. It is also thoroughly commoditized. There is simply no way for any company to enjoy pricing power in it without an improbably vast cartel or some strictly policed patents and trademarks.
Why should the collective society of coffee-drinkers indulge Keurig's attempt to achieve economic profits (positive returns when considering opportunity cost) by allowing them to differentiate their sub-market to the point where they enjoy pricing power in it? Is their coffee that much better than all available alternatives? I have similar questions about Starbucks. How do they manage to charge more than the basic commodity price?
It almost seems as though the coffee itself is not the whole product, but it also includes the ritual and ceremony of preparing it. It also looks quite a bit like the market for wines and beers, where the price that the market will bear is determined mostly by the printing on the label.
Given those assumptions, my analysis is that Keurig is approaching their problem from the worst possible angle. Inserting technical countermeasures into the hardware will never work (as repeatedly demonstrated by pwn-your-own-device hackers). They should instead pour that cash into advertising and reward-based psychology. Institute some form of intermittent reward system for using genuine, trademark-branded consumables.
You cannot ever employ enough clever engineers to defeat the legion of people with physical possession of the item and a desire to make it do what its owner desires, instead of obeying its pre-programmed manufacturer directives. Annoying your customers simply does not add value to your product.
[+] [-] DigitalSea|11 years ago|reply