Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM

[Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>]

On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 10:57:50PM +0100, Jan Alsenz wrote:
> > 
> > You took the least relevant part of my argument, and assumed this is the reason
> > I object to TPMs.  Please check the rest of my previous mail.
> 
> I didn't assume that. And I picked this argument because it is the only one I
> object!
> Because I think it is not an argument...
> 
> > Anyway, it's obvious that I trust my CPU because I have no other choice.  The
> > context in which I said this, is different: there are better choices there.
> 
> ... and since you seem to agree, please don't use it.
> 
> 
> You seem to assume, that I really like the idea of a TPM, or something like that.
> I can assure you, that this is not the case. My only goal is to keep the
> discussion based on facts and reason. Which way too often get lost in this kind
> of discussion (and I want to stress that this is not an accusation to anyone here).

Thanks for clarifiing, I appreciate your response.

-- 
Robert Millan

  The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
  how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
  still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."