3 ms·
IMO the line is my device having non-removable hardware modules that are specifically designed to protect the device from me, its legitimate owner. I'm fine wit
by grishka 2y ago
IMO the line is my device having non-removable hardware modules that are specifically designed to protect the device from me, its legitimate owner. I'm fine with software-only DRM, it'll always get broken by someone eventually anyway. But all the ARM TrustZone bullshit and secure boot with unchangeable signing keys? This has no right to exist in this universe.
And I don't give much of a crap about copyright owners. Copyright in its current form mostly doesn't work for its intended purpose anyway, it only works for corporate rent seeking.
- talldayo 2y agoYou and I can agree on all that, but it won't make anyone care. When the dust settles, the ARM TrustZone bullshit and bootloader locking is justifiable, even if only with inferior rationale. The state of consumer protections in America are not even remotely advanced enough to push back on this behavior, and businesses are ever grateful. Zooming out, fighting against DRM APIs is not even a hill worth dying on. Stopping it would mean attacking a healthy and legal market that has multiple worse alternatives they can roll out. A more realistic goal is separating App Stores and App runtimes, to prevent anyone from conflating the two and playing keep-away with basic functionality of devices that people own.