Anon said:
Is someone being reasonable for saying: "If you walk
over there I won't shoot you" while holding a gun?"
This seems
very different. Microsoft had basically 3 options:
- Forbid
disable and custom key options (like they do on ARM)
- Leave
implementation of disable and custom key options optional
-
Require disable and custom key options
Microsoft chose the
third path which is clearly the best as for as end-owner control is
concerned.
The only other possibility (that I see) would be for Microsoft
to ignore secure boot technology. I don't think this is a reasonable
expectation, nor do I think Microsoft is "evil" for pursuing this technology.
Secure boot is good
and worthwhile technology. It is inevitably going to be
implemented. The only question is whether end-owners are going to have control
over their own machines or not. I applaud Microsoft for taking a stand (in this
case) for making sure end-owners do have control of their own
machines.
--- Our job is to remind ourselves that there are more
contexts
than the one we’re in now — the one that we think is reality.
-- Alan Kay [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|