On 2013/03/02 15:18, Tom H wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 11:15 PM, jdow <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> On 2013/03/01 09:26, Tom H wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 7:08 PM, jdow <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>> On 2013/02/28 11:56, Tom H wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Robert Blair <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>>> On 02/28/2013 01:35 PM, Tom H wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I wouldn't be surprised if SB became "un-disable-able" in the next
>>>>>>> few years. We'd then have to use an MS-signed shim to boot, as is
>>>>>>> now the case with the default Fedora and Ubuntu SB setups.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe I've missed something here. If a generic "MS signed shim" is
>>>>>> available what value does this add? Wouldn't such a shim make booting
>>>>>> anything alternative possible?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm sorry. It's not as generic as I made it look. AIUI, the shim is a
>>>>> basic stage 1 (or maybe stage 0.5) bootloader whose signature's
>>>>> validated against an MS key in the computer's ROM. Grub and the kernel
>>>>> (and its modules in Fedora's case but not in Ubuntu's) are then
>>>>> validated against a Fedora key in the shim.
>>>>
>>>> Which is the end of compiling your own code.
>>>
>>> You mean "compiling your own kernel without spending a one-time fee of USD
>>> 99."
>>
>> A difference which makes no practical difference is no difference at all.
>
> Of course there's a difference. It's grub and the kernel and its
> modules that you can't compile without signing.

You missed the point, Tom. To a retired person a $100 bill is a serious
amount of eating that has to be traded off with it. If that cannot be
afforded without sacrifice then it might as well not exist as an option.
That is the difference that makes no practical difference.

The Microsoft extension to the issue is essentially the locked cellphone
situation under which I could not code up any new assistive technology
for myself and use it. It becomes me paying to have Microsoft own my
device. And I'd have to pay them to use my own work on a machine I have
every right to regard as my own machine.

If Linux is going to systematically support that kind of a model in any
way, I'm outahere.

{^_^}