Why are you telling me “It can’t be done without corporate involvement” like it’s some kind of persuasive point 😭

This entire announcement is literally about an creation of a for-profit company to deliver hardware attestation in linux as a product 🤣

I unfortunately accept the reality of our corporate dominated technology landscape, I’m just confused about your downright enthusiasm for the same.

How is systemd somehow taking away freedoms at the behest of corporations who asked such a thing?

RedHat putting their thumb on the scale providing full time engineers on this project to gain market share and become the defacto standard that they control doesn’t sound like a problem? How do you feel about what chromium is doing to the web?

UEFI is an open standard, buddy. Microsoft is the only player fucking that up

Microsoft is the only player “fucking that up” right. And the other corporations have some sort of god-given goodness to them that make it impossible for them to follow suit?

“Trusted Computing” has existed in the very hardware you own and run for almost 30 years now. Literally nobody but cellphone makers use it in the way you describe. Seems you’re still using it though, so nobody seems to have made the apocalyptic decisions that bring your fearful future to bear.

Nobody but (half of the entire consumer device market) use it in the way described, and this company comes in offering tools to do the same thing to the other half, and you don’t see the problem?

A “Trusted Computing” framework - and this is how I know you don’t understand any of this - is only present. It takes software to interact with it to “take your freedoms away” as you put it.

Software that these people are developing.

“…we just provide the tools…”. MY GOD. Where do I even start with this? I can name about a hundred different FOSS tools that break encryption. You mad at the people who made the FOSS encryption tools, or the ones who the FOSS tools to decrypt it?

I’m wary of the people that provide turn key solutions to deploy it at scale

The only people who want this are people make and produce hardware platforms that ship out into the world so they can ensure they are T2B secure. It seems you don’t know much about security, so I’ll let you in a little secret…(If it claims to be secure, it means there are hardware controls in place)

And if the user (that’s what we call the person who owns the device, if you don’t know much about these things) doesn’t want it?

We know from systemd that these people are willing to use corporate resources to snuff out grassroots alternatives to grow their market share, and we know from the sorry state of boot chains on basically every device that isn’t x86 UEFI that corporations are salivating at the idea of implementing trusted computing at the expense of user freedoms, and we know know from the above quotes that the best assurance the founders of this companies have is “we just provide the tools, it’s up to the corporations to decide how to use it, teehee!” The only mystery here is people like you here who see all this and think “surely things will go different this time. these are good boys”.

He’s very CLEARLY illustrating his intent to prevent the very thing you’re shutting your pants about

It will always be up to the distro

We don’t really have any control over what Microsoft decides to do

where is the prevention brother?

“Found to be better” because of commercial resources and support pouring in and outcompeting grassroots alternatives to gain market share. Do you share the same lukewarm acceptance for what chromium is doing for web browsers?

better than reading the damn article, here are the weasily corporate words directly from mr daan the founder 🤣

So adding all of this technology will certainly make it more easy to be used for either good or bad. And it will certainly become possible to build an OS that will be less hackable than your run of the mill Linux distro.

Yes, this commercial entity founded by people who have a literal track record of doing exactly that

Yes, that’s correct, the last 5 years should have made clear to anybody that the “actual needs of an entire industry” and the needs of the people are diametrically opposed.

I can’t imagine anyone sane would hold onto the belief that it will remain just “a nice feature to enable” after looking at the historical encroachment of commercial interests in mobile phone boot chain setups. I tell you the truth that after widespread adoption this WILL turn into a “not nice feature that you cannot disable”, and you can forget about enrolling your own keys as well.

There is no conflict here, the strain of “serving” clankers denies resources to real people that actually need to access that information.

But if you have high quality FLAC or Opus sources (or really high-end analog), you do not have to be an audiophile to tell the difference

The analysis showed that there was no statistically significant difference in quality between the un- compressed signals and AAC-LC 320 kbps compression, which means participants did not perceive difference between two formats

https://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/whp/whp-pdf-files/WHP384.pdf