zlacker

>>foodst+(OP)
Will this allow my computer, in the future, to be as locked as current smartphones? Will this allow software to refuse to run or services to refuse to work depending on third party software I have installed?

>>marcod+J9
Everything needed to lock down your computer as much as a phone already exists, there's no need for a TPM or Pluton to do so.

>>mjg59+Aa
There's a huge difference between "exists" and "is now commonly available and made easier to use". The frog-boiling is slow, but an increasingly large number of us are becoming aware of this new rise of corporate authoritarianism, and we know how it will end if we do not fight it as hard as we can.

>>userbi+3c
All Microsoft need to do to block other operating systems from PCs is change their policy around secure boot. All they need to do to prevent unsigned apps from running is change the default behaviour of Windows. The code exists. It's deployed. It's commonly available.

>>mjg59+qc
Yup, it's that close. I'm honestly happy there's an outrage ahead of releases of chips like that. Some systems did get secureboot locked down. Maybe we get the policy we got exactly because people are still outraged.

I'll take that any day over ms+Intel releasing a t2-equivalent + SB combo as required in all new certified laptops and people realising too late.