Slashdot Mirror
Cringely: MS To Hurt Linux Via USB Enhancements
frogspit writes "In this article, Cringely suggests that MS's proposed enhancements to USB to address security issues have the added benefit (for them) of hurting Linux."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Financial reasons for them NOT doing it aside
Yeah -- in Soviet Russia, OS X runs your PC.
“Wait for Hurd if you want something real” –Linus
"To boil a frog you can't just throw a live frog into a hot pot of water (it'll jump out). What you do is put a frog in a cold pot of water and slowly turn up the heat, the frog never leaps out because the change is too slowly, then when the water's too hot the frog can't jump out because it's dead." MS keeps making computing less and less under your control. Everyone puts up with it because they do it slowly. No one 'jumps out' because they dont realize the heat is being turned up.
just work, every time, without fail
They don't have to achieve that. They just need to make things work in the same ballpark as they do now while ensuring that is doesn't work at all on a non-Trusted machines.
Probably the easiest comparison would be to try permanantly shutting off your cookies and javascript. A non-trivial percentage of websites simply refuses to work unless you activate cookies and/or javascript. You will constantly be faced with a choice of turning them on to get the sites to work, or refusing to submit and getting locked out of more and more websites.
faith in the market
The basic market forces act to ensure the success of the system.
In attempting to oppose cookies and javascript *you* are the one that suffers, just as in attempting to oppose Trusted Computing *you* are the one that suffers. Those who accept Trusted computing will receive free music in their HappyMeals, music you refuse to be able to play. They will be given free software and be able to buy software, software which you refuse to be able to use. They will be able to view and use websites you refuse to be able to use.
The only way such opposition could succeed is if a large percentage of clueless computer users are willing to suffer in resistance, widespread self sacrificing resistance. That can only happen if the mainstream media comes out against Trusted Computing. And even then it will be a very difficult fight. Trusted Computing products do and will conseal the fact that they are Trusted Computing based. For example HP's system is called ProtectTools with no mention of Trust. IBM's current Man in Black ThinkPad commercials advertize the security chip "protecting you from hackers" without mentioning Trust. Even this Slashdot story Cisco Working to Block Viruses at the Router completely missed the fact that these routers are Trusted Computing based, and I deft you to find an admission anywhere on Cisco's website that there is any connection between these routers and Trusted Computing.
And on top of that there will still be tons of people unknowingly activating/using Trusted Computing in order to be able to play the freebie music disk they got inside a McDonalds HappyMeal. They can resist and get nothing, or submit and get free music.
Practically every computer-related company on the Fortune 500 is a member of the Trusted Computing Group or is otherwise involved. They have very good reason to think it can and will happen.
Stopping Trusted Computing is not going to be easy. We need mainstream media support. We need as much active opposition as possible. We need those who understand the threat not to assume it can't happen.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.