On Friday 09 February 2007 18:26, Tim Thornton wrote: ... > I can trust your computer not to reveal my secrets to you,
Do you not see how this is a bad thing - how this can be abused? I buy a car. It does what I tell it (well it would if I drove). I buy a hammer it bangs what I want to bang. I buy a phone. It phones where I tell it. I buy a general purpose computer, it does what I tell it. Or should. I need to be able to trust *my* machines, if it doesn't do what I tell it, I can't trust it. I don't want *my* property keeping secrets from me. If you do not trust me, but wish to deliver it by machine, then it is up to you to provide to me a machine *you* trust, it is not up to me to provide *you* a machine that you trust. Also, its a false "trust". Your "secret" is audio and video. That's not a secret at all. BTW, I'm not arguing the /technology/ is broken. After all, using the same technology you can make things like secure personal storage are more secure and trustable by the user: * http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6633 Michael. -- All the above are my opinions only. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/