@marcan @darkling @mjg59 FSF's approach is the worst of both worlds. It genuinely baffles me that they keep doing it. Do they have *any* argument for carrying on with it other than the "ROM is hardware" BS?
It's not even like the practical consequences of this classification are unproven. Lots, if not most of hardware I've seen that proudly boasts RYF take inane steps to pretend firmware doesn't exist, in ways that don't limit their capacity for harm whatsoever...
@asu @marcan @darkling @mjg59 As far as I can guess, it breaks down into two fundamental concerns:
1) We can't allow our flock to be tempted. Make them rip out anything that would run proprietary software.
2) We need a way to "grandfather" into compliance the devices we have already been using. If we say the proprietary firmware in the Embedded Controller (and countless other cores) in RMS' Thinkpad is "just part of the hardware" for <some reason> we can pretend it doesn't exist.
@developing_agent @asu @marcan @darkling the EC firmware that exists in flash and can be upgraded? Huh.
