> Again, I doubt I can prove to you that the conspiracy doesn't exist, but it is so entirely unlikely given what we've seen so far. I don't think there's a big

> Again, I doubt I can prove to you that the conspiracy doesn't exist, but it is so entirely unlikely given what we've seen so far. I don't think there's a big conspiracy. I think it's the logical end result of having that technology built, adopted, and at a critical mass. If you can do device attestation or identity attestation for an authentication request, it's not much of a stretch to think that can easily be extended to make arbitrary requests for a user or app to be allowed to perform an action. I think that'll be focused around accessing data. For example, what if copy / paste is an authorized action that only gives you encrypted data which requires a key from your TPM to be decrypted and the TPM is only willing to decrypt it for a specific app / process? I view it about the same as having a GPG key that I escrow with Microsoft and that key is used to sign, attest, encrypt, decrypt, etc.. I think Passwordless is the system that's going to get a majority of users set up with keys that are "escrowed" behind a TPM (or similar). I think the temptation to gate your data behind a key you don't control is going to be too much for big tech to resist. I bet a ton of people and business will even opt in to a system like that if they're sold the promise of having their data secured from bad actors. It's not even a false promise at that point. It's just that you have to give up control of your data for it to work.