Okay, am I crazy, or did Brian not mention that TCPA and Palladium are two different initiatives? TCPA is simply one specification that uses the TPM, Palladium is a whole computer-BIOS-OS-kitchen-sink pile of Microsoft crap. While it is concievable that Microsoft would use TCPA in Palladium, it's also concievable that they would develop their own, proprietary thing and try to force people to use that instead. That seems to be their case history. And the consumers I was referring to, as was Brian, are mostly motherboard manufacturers, who are AMI's direct customers, and thus they, not us, are who pays Brian's paycheck. So yeah, AMI could decide not to implement TCPA in their BIOS, but then they'd be up shit creek when none of the manufacturers bought it. So if you really have a beef with TCPA, which I'm not sure is a legitimate one, follow the advice of several posts and yell at the mobo people, since it's actually them that are "forcing" AMI to implement this. And, remember, TCPA has a definite on-off switch, so sometime in 2010 when you buy a board with TCPA on it and want to run a non-certified (if there is such thing) OS, just turn it off. Voila, works fine. Seriously, I'm not sure why everyone is so up in arms about this. The general paranoia about DRM (which is something I'm definitely opposed to) seems to be bleeding over into things that don't technically have anything to do with it. Metaphor: a small microphone. (Bear with me.) No one gives the manufacturers of bug mics hell, and yet they can be used to invade your privacy just as much. Someone could bug your house, tap your phone, etc., yet I don't hear anyone bitching about them, because they have plenty of good uses as well. The problem here is that peoples' vision is so mucked up by all the RIAA's bullshit that they aren't seeing the potential benefits, they're only seeing what Big Brother might use it for. And yeah, that scares me, but it seems like not such a big threat, given that you can turn it off! Plus, if you're worried that MS Windows will turn it back on behind your back, don't use Windows! It amazes how many people bitch about how much Windows sucks (and I wholeheartedly agree) yet they go right on using it. If you're really worried about MS, then use Linux, FreeBSD, OS/2, Mac/OS, AmigaOS, BeOS, anything. As far as I can tell by this article, nothing in TCPA is going to hinder any of them from running fine. And if it does, turn it off. Simple.
Okay, I don't know very much about TCPA/Palladium at all, so forgive me if I sound silly. But it seems to me that Brian made clear several times, even referencing the TCPA documents, that TCPA is not equivalent to DRM. Once again, it's an issue where the TPM can, and most certainly will, be used for DRM, but what I think Brian is trying to point out is that it can, and will, have other uses. As a few posts have pointed out, it would be pretty nifty to have a hardware chip that can do cryptography of some sort, at least to take a load off the CPU. So I'm not sure what you have to be pissed off about. AMI sees that they have customers (be they mobo manufacturers, Dell, or Joe Ugly on the street) that want TCPA-enable BIOSes, so they make them. End of story. It has nothing to do with AMI supporting some sort of RIAA-induced control mania. It's a simply question of supply and demand.
Slashdot Mirror
Okay, am I crazy, or did Brian not mention that TCPA and Palladium are two different initiatives? TCPA is simply one specification that uses the TPM, Palladium is a whole computer-BIOS-OS-kitchen-sink pile of Microsoft crap. While it is concievable that Microsoft would use TCPA in Palladium, it's also concievable that they would develop their own, proprietary thing and try to force people to use that instead. That seems to be their case history. And the consumers I was referring to, as was Brian, are mostly motherboard manufacturers, who are AMI's direct customers, and thus they, not us, are who pays Brian's paycheck. So yeah, AMI could decide not to implement TCPA in their BIOS, but then they'd be up shit creek when none of the manufacturers bought it. So if you really have a beef with TCPA, which I'm not sure is a legitimate one, follow the advice of several posts and yell at the mobo people, since it's actually them that are "forcing" AMI to implement this. And, remember, TCPA has a definite on-off switch, so sometime in 2010 when you buy a board with TCPA on it and want to run a non-certified (if there is such thing) OS, just turn it off. Voila, works fine. Seriously, I'm not sure why everyone is so up in arms about this. The general paranoia about DRM (which is something I'm definitely opposed to) seems to be bleeding over into things that don't technically have anything to do with it. Metaphor: a small microphone. (Bear with me.) No one gives the manufacturers of bug mics hell, and yet they can be used to invade your privacy just as much. Someone could bug your house, tap your phone, etc., yet I don't hear anyone bitching about them, because they have plenty of good uses as well. The problem here is that peoples' vision is so mucked up by all the RIAA's bullshit that they aren't seeing the potential benefits, they're only seeing what Big Brother might use it for. And yeah, that scares me, but it seems like not such a big threat, given that you can turn it off! Plus, if you're worried that MS Windows will turn it back on behind your back, don't use Windows! It amazes how many people bitch about how much Windows sucks (and I wholeheartedly agree) yet they go right on using it. If you're really worried about MS, then use Linux, FreeBSD, OS/2, Mac/OS, AmigaOS, BeOS, anything. As far as I can tell by this article, nothing in TCPA is going to hinder any of them from running fine. And if it does, turn it off. Simple.
Okay, I don't know very much about TCPA/Palladium at all, so forgive me if I sound silly. But it seems to me that Brian made clear several times, even referencing the TCPA documents, that TCPA is not equivalent to DRM. Once again, it's an issue where the TPM can, and most certainly will, be used for DRM, but what I think Brian is trying to point out is that it can, and will, have other uses. As a few posts have pointed out, it would be pretty nifty to have a hardware chip that can do cryptography of some sort, at least to take a load off the CPU. So I'm not sure what you have to be pissed off about. AMI sees that they have customers (be they mobo manufacturers, Dell, or Joe Ugly on the street) that want TCPA-enable BIOSes, so they make them. End of story. It has nothing to do with AMI supporting some sort of RIAA-induced control mania. It's a simply question of supply and demand.