This is a veiled attack on user freedom itself. The article is based on the idea that software isn't free and doesn't give controls to the user that the user sh

This is a veiled attack on user freedom itself. The article is based on the idea that software isn't free and doesn't give controls to the user that the user should rightfully have as the device owner. When it talks about security models and "modern security features", it assumes that the running software utilities aren't trusted. One interesting point is the firmware being difficult to update. I guess that that could hypothetically become an issue if the firmware were open-sourced or reversed, but still it seems like a reasonable decision once you realize that firmware updates can introduce new bugs/vulnerabilities.