|
|
|
|
|
by npteljes
1191 days ago
|
|
It's true that we haven't got a remote exploit yet, or at least, it's not publicly known. And I agree that it can be useful, convenient even, for everyone involved. It does however give up a good amount of control, the end user's control over their own machine. >this is not a nefarious thing Hell is paved with good intentions. The intent is irrelevant. Every substance that we banned so far in agriculture were developed, and used with the intent of improving the crops. Yet, they turned out to be a net negative. We don't know the end game of the ME/PSP yet, but I'm not keen to participate, I'd gladly buy a CPU without it, and let other people find out. |
|