Mike Miller wrote: > On Tue, 10 May 2005, Ryan Ware wrote: > >> On 5/10/05, Richard Hoffbeck <rwh at visi.com> wrote: >> <snip> >> >>> If you look at the requirements of 'trusted computing' there is no way >>> that it can be good for OSS. For it to be effective it has to be >> >> >> Am I mistaken, or didn't Linus just state that trusted computing was >> an idea whose time has come? > > > I would say that there are some indications of that: > > http://www.google.com/search?q=%22trusted+computing%22+torvalds > > >> I think most of the open source community has taken a rather Ned Lud >> view point on this whereas I think it will be more of a tide that >> raises the level of all the ships (Linux, Unix, Windows, etc) It >> might be a little more work for everyone, but it will get done. > > > Or maybe it will be an unparalleled disaster that puts giant > multinational corporations in control of what we can do with our > computers... > > http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=5858 > He was talking about SELinux. The underlying issue, as Stallman points out, is who gets to determine who is 'trusted'. I'd prefer it was me :-) Linus was also open to including DRM into Linux. I don't have any problem with that, but you can't have effective DRM unless you take the determination of trust out of the hands of the machine owner. Otherwise, as Bruce Schneier is always pointing out, you're DRM scheme will be broken if you have free access to the hardware and software. The breaks of Apple and MS's DRM makes that pretty clear. --rick