it doesn't matter. you are seeing the purpose of tpms as end user protection.
but that isn't what it's about anymore. it's about empowering actors that manage end user colonies. to the extent they share an interest in user security, they'll provide some help. but it's about the colony managers, not us.
so when you see all this stuff about tpm and carriers, os vendors and large companies, don't make the wavoid mistake of assuming this means privacy benefits to end users.
will nsa concede protections to these colony managers?
let's think plausible thoughts. nsa has utterly subverted the system in every way imaginable. it wants to continue to be able to do so. if you are thinking tpm makes a difference, watch the video and contemplate whether this new security model is somehow permitted to devalue all of the investments they have already made!
will the enterprises which sell user data suddenly see the value of end user privacy rights?
of course not. their businesses depend upon the removal of our information from us and its resale to their supply chain partners.
the folks who have designed in the back doors everywhere, the folks whose business models rely on selling your information, are the same folks who are designing the tcg architecture.
you think they are free of government influence? you think they will protect your privacy from their wish to monetise it?
as the character who is being followed by the hoodlums in no country for old men exclaims: "there ain't no way."
they care about protecting corporate assets. end users are meaningful only as sources of information.
corporate interests submit to sovereign control. end user interests are subject to corporate control.
watch the video.
as a person who is interested in building end user powers, tcg has stopped being interesting. it's turning into another boring hierarchy. end users are the bottom of the heap.
| 