Of course there will always be objections to any change. Everything is a trade-off. But if you wanted a truly secure device, you have to start with idea that ev

Of course there will always be objections to any change. Everything is a trade-off. But if you wanted a truly secure device, you have to start with idea that every customer gets the same thing - a truly blank slate. It's only recently, and with incredible device density, that this assumption has changed. The fact that manufacturers CAN put extra CPUs and CAN put unique hidden, immutable data in your computer does mean it MUST be so. This is simply the path we've been going down for about the last 20 years or so. It doesn't mean we have to keep going down that path. I'd also add that computers have multiple CPUs, and an FPGA and an M1, for example, could coexist, with the FPGA serving as the BIOS and firmware repository. I think there are real and frankly chilling reasons why manufacturers will not take this approach, and it's not because of economics. A truly free device is a threat to the establishment.