51–60 of 64 posts
To be fair, see: https://libreboot.org/faq/#intel
Given that AMD and Intel are both driven by large for profit customers and their requirements, these concerns will probably only get worse. ARM is probably the closest open chip platform out there, but even that is not Free in the FSF sense or $ sense. It seems that the project is going to forgo user-base for principles, and then most likely no longer be relevant. It's great to try and fight for and defend your princ…
And i trust Samsung with security even less than AMD or Intel.
Given that AMD and Intel are both driven by large for profit customers and their requirements, these concerns will probably only get worse. ARM is probably the closest open chip platform out there, but even that is not Free in the FSF sense or $ sense. It seems that the project is going to forgo user-base for principles, and then most likely no longer be relevant. It's great to try and fight for and defend your princ…
Given that AMD and Intel are both driven by large for profit customers and their requirements, these concerns will probably only get worse. ARM is probably the closest open chip platform out there, but even that is not Free in the FSF sense or $ sense. It seems that the project is going to forgo user-base for principles, and then most likely no longer be relevant. It's great to try and fight for and defend your princ…
I don't know what you think is open about ARM. AMD even uses the ARM locking-down technology to implement its system management processor.
tl;dr: It's not just AMD, it's anything AMD after 2013 and anything Intel after 2009. So essentially all modern x86 hardware.
(disclaimer: I'm working at VIA)
Given that AMD and Intel are both driven by large for profit customers and their requirements, these concerns will probably only get worse. ARM is probably the closest open chip platform out there, but even that is not Free in the FSF sense or $ sense. It seems that the project is going to forgo user-base for principles, and then most likely no longer be relevant. It's great to try and fight for and defend your princ…
"ARM is probably the closest open chip platform out there" I don't know what you think is open about ARM. AMD even uses the ARM locking-down technology to implement its system management processor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> everyone else also has the freedom to control what your machine runs. > Giving everyone control of your machine like... [citation needed] Coreboot giving everyone access? The entire point of the project is so you know and can verify there’s no backdoor to your CPU. How do you turn it around 180°…? This is so dishonest.
How many people are qualified to "verify there's no backdoor to your CPU"? Certainly not your average user. If you can't trust your CPU, what can you trust? Allowing Secure Boot to be bypassed is a backdoor in itself. Allowing the end-user to modify the firmware at all also allows malicious actors to do the same.
Like Ubuntu does?
http://firmwaresecurity.com/2016/01/07/ubuntus-uefi-secure-b...
To be fair, see: https://libreboot.org/faq/#intel
I was wondering this myself. I was wondering why they were focusing so much on AMD when all AMD did was copy Intel's horrible idea. It seems kind of pointless to continue the Libreboot project if they're not going to work on any modern hardware for the foreseeable future. Their recommended systems are all old and out of production. Fastest recommended laptop seems to be roughly a Core2Duo at 2.0Ghz.
For desktops, it simply needs to get into the fast enough territory.
I guess the better question would be why they're even bothering any more when they only support a few ancient Thinkpads and a couple of decade old Apple laptops. For better or worse, I think they've lost this battle.
I don't often find myself wishing for a more powerful machine. When I do, I run computations on remote servers.