On Fri, 20 Jan 2006, T. Joseph CARTER wrote: > On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 06:38:53AM -0800, Alan wrote: > > >I didn't see the Cc on the original mail (which was kept in my reply until > > >30 seconds before I hit the send button. Decided to leave it there. It > > >will give him fits. Won't change his mind, but it will give him fits. > > > > I'm sure that RMS is so used to boorish behaviour that your comments > > will hardly register, let alone elicit the type of reaction you > > apparently desire. > > So you think it's a good thing for Microsoft to be allowed, under the GPL, > to make Linux on any Dell machine illegal, by coercing Dell into using a > TPM chip in their machines? Do you think this is a brilliant strategy to > make the world more free and less dependent on proprietary software?
The only problem I can find with TPM is who holds the keys. If I am not allowed access to the keys as the physical owner of the box, then there is a *big* problem. TPM can be useful to secure a box. Unfortunatly the OS manufacturers and hardware vendors are conspiring to protect the box from the physical owners of the hardware. That needs to be stopped. -- "George W. Bush -- Bringing back the Sixties one Nixon at a time." _______________________________________________ EUGLUG mailing list [email protected] http://www.euglug.org/mailman/listinfo/euglug
