> Your summary of trusted computing is so off the mark, it is laughable. All trusted computing does is basically remove your option for ripping off digital data.
The only way it can do so is by taking control of your computer away from you and putting it in the hands of somebody else. That’s why it’s called "trusted computing" - it’s not that you can trust your computer, it’s that the corporations can trust your computer.
Once you lose control of your own computer, the various nasty things Stallman describes are indeed possible. And we can see from Microsoft’s previous behaviour, it is capable of some very nasty, anticompetitive, consumer-harming actions. So these nasty things are not only *possible* but *probable*.
> If you are upset about that, then you are a thief
Copyright infringement is not theft. Please refer to Dowling vs US, 1985 if you disagree.
The rest of your post is misinformed scaremongering that Stallman actually addressed in the article if you would bother to read and understand it. There’s nothing about trusted computing that stops people from breaking into your computer.
I dislike this article, but for different reasons to you. It seems to be all over the place - I can’t tell who the audience is meant to be. Some parts seem to be geared towards non-techies, others will confuse or alienate them. The whole thing reads like a paranoid conspiracy rant, mostly due to the choice of language, I think. I am sympathetic to the point Stallman is trying to make, but from reading his other work, I feel he is capable of writing a much more convincing piece than this.
> Your summary of trusted computing is so off the mark, it is laughable. All trusted computing does is basically remove your option for ripping off digital data.
The only way it can do so is by taking control of your computer away from you and putting it in the hands of somebody else. That’s why it’s called "trusted computing" - it’s not that you can trust your computer, it’s that the corporations can trust your computer.
Once you lose control of your own computer, the various nasty things Stallman describes are indeed possible. And we can see from Microsoft’s previous behaviour, it is capable of some very nasty, anticompetitive, consumer-harming actions. So these nasty things are not only *possible* but *probable*.
> If you are upset about that, then you are a thief
Copyright infringement is not theft. Please refer to Dowling vs US, 1985 if you disagree.
The rest of your post is misinformed scaremongering that Stallman actually addressed in the article if you would bother to read and understand it. There’s nothing about trusted computing that stops people from breaking into your computer.
I dislike this article, but for different reasons to you. It seems to be all over the place - I can’t tell who the audience is meant to be. Some parts seem to be geared towards non-techies, others will confuse or alienate them. The whole thing reads like a paranoid conspiracy rant, mostly due to the choice of language, I think. I am sympathetic to the point Stallman is trying to make, but from reading his other work, I feel he is capable of writing a much more convincing piece than this.