On Fri, 2006-05-19 at 21:09 +0200, Jörg Bornschein wrote: > Jörg Bornschein wrote: > > We are discussing in the context of l4-hurd, an free (as in "open > > source") operating system. So right now, this cost is reduced to > > "install another version with an integrated debugger". This cost is > > IMHO negligible. > Maybe I should write down where I'd like to end up: > > Given a non-TPM, open source system which hardware I own: opaque memory > is a voluntary feature which can not be relied on. (in the eyes of a > software "vendor"). > > Especially: It does not harm the the idea (ideology) of information freedom. > > In this case its more comparable to the private/protected access > modifier in most object oriented programming languages.
I think that for users like you (i.e. developers) this is a fair analysis. For most end users the perceived cost of this is much higher, but then again, those users don't know how to work debuggers in any case. shap _______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
