6 ms·

Intel ME already can spit out the UUID of the chip and has been able to do it for over a decade.

• amluto 7y ago
  So can SGX (under certain circumstances). So can your hard disk, your NIC, and probably your firmware via DMI.
  • moftz 7y ago
    Right, but those components typically don't have unchecked access to the rest of the system via back doors.
    • amluto 7y ago
      Your NIC is at least as dangerous as ME if you don’t have the ME connected to the network.
• binarymax 7y ago
  Yes. Hence the 'death by a thousand cuts'. We couldn't fight every battle. We lost.
  • stcredzero 7y ago
    Hence the 'death by a thousand cuts'. We couldn't fight every battle. We lost. So does the future belong to those who can administer the "thousand cuts?" In 2019, that means those who own the Cloud server farms and control the organizations that hire hordes of programmers. Does that mean that privacy is dead by an inexorable process? Doesn't that imply that individual liberty is also, eventually, dead? How can we, the people, administer the thousand cuts?
    • sbierwagen 7y ago
      >Does that mean that privacy is dead by an inexorable process? Yes. >Doesn't that imply that individual liberty is also, eventually, dead? Yes. >How can we, the people, administer the thousand cuts? Stop carrying a cell phone. There was a brief period of time, from 1990 to 8:40 AM, September 11th, 2001, when you could do all sorts of stuff online, and the powers that be either didn't, or couldn't, monitor it. That's changed, and that freedom will never come back. However, no matter how bad the modern surveillance state gets, contrast it to the ancestral environment: a village of 50 to 200 people, most of whom are related to you, watch your every move, and can determine if you live or die. Hunter gatherers don't even have a word for "privacy". It would take real creativity for things to get that bad today.
      • deogeo 7y ago
        > It would take real creativity for things to get that bad today. It is easily as bad or worse. Those 50-200 people knew and cared for each-other, and depended on each-other, and the surveillance was bidirectional. Whereas now you are monitored by actors almost entirely beyond your reach, that will feel no remorse in crushing you, should the command be given by whoever is in control.
        • kybernetikos 7y ago
          > by whoever is in control. Which may ultimately be a poorly tested, bias-ridden bit of AI code.
          • deogeo 7y ago
            That is why 1984 is such a positive, optimistic work - all the nightmarish oppression worked so well and without bias!
            • TeMPOraL 7y ago
              Also, and similarly to where conspiracy theories usually get the world wrong - someone was actually in control. In real life, no one is.