Comment by Terretta

>> Do we want our fundamental computing environment to be ultimately under our control, or controlled by private interests with their own incentives?

Define "our".

Because having general compute under developer/engineering control does not mean end-users want, need, or should, tinker inside appliances.

So there are two definitions of our: our end-users, and ourselves the engineers.

Worldwide, in aggregate, far more harms come to users from malware, destroying work at the office and life memories at home, than benefits from non-tech-savvy users being able to agree to a dialog box (INSTALL THIS OR YOUR VOTING REGISTRATION WILL BE SWITCHED IN 30 MINUTES!!!) and have rootkits happen.

Our (hackers) tinkering being extra-steps guardrailed by hardware that we can work within, to help us help general computing become as "don't make me think, and don't do me harm" as a nightstand radio clock, seems a good thing.

Not hard to see through the false "only two cases" premise of the quote, however un-hip to agree so.