Do you believe we own our phones today, in a control sense? If not, you might not be open to my view. I think we are collectively accepting that the power tools

Do you believe we own our phones today, in a control sense? If not, you might not be open to my view. I think we are collectively accepting that the power tools-like capability of computers tends to be used against the general consumer more than they use it themselves, hence the move of some critical auth work into chips like the TPM/TEE/SEP. I think I engaged in some of the same Slashdot discussions back then, but anymore, I only see a cybersecurity war currently which we seem to be losing. Could TPM requirements be the metaphorical camel's nose under the tent before we end up with a global immutable ID that spies on me and reports everything I do to enable a surveillance dystopia? Can I be blocked by some remote authority for good via remote TPM attestation requirements and denied the ability to execute code, make network requests? The 'state' as it were doesn't seem to be able to take control of our computing from the current equilibrium of OS+hardware stacks available to the world, despite the predictions from TPM opponents. At least yet. Open-source OSes are arguably stronger than ever. Some of the corporate players have positioned themselves as some of the biggest roadblocks to state control, or transformed into security companies. The corporate-state merger of control over the consumer hasn't quite materialized the way it was predicted. Complexity is way, way up, but the idea you own your own computer is still there, for a lot of definitions of 'own'. Are you willing to anchor your trust in even a single other entity? Will you run code you have no idea how to understand or the time/resources to audit? The complexity today seems so high and the amount of trust to get anything done so substantial, I don't know how relevant computing purity arguments are any longer.