Re: [Fsfe-france] Re: Rapport d' information sur la stratégie de sécurité économique nationale

[Xavier Roche]

Christophe Espern wrote:
> Vous voyez d'autres choses ?

Le fait que plusieurs experts sont opposés à ce système orwellien ?

http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-0208.html
"There's a lot of good stuff in Pd, and a lot I like about it. There's 
also a lot I don't like, and am scared of. My fear is that Pd will lead 
us down a road where our computers are no longer our computers, but are 
instead owned by a variety of factions and companies all looking for a 
piece of our wallet. To the extent that Pd facilitates that reality, 
it's bad for society. I don't mind companies selling, renting, or 
licensing things to me, but the loss of the power, reach, and 
flexibility of the computer is too great a price to pay."

Et également:
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/rja14/tcpa-faq.html

11. How can TC be abused?
17. Who else will lose?
20. But hang on, isn't TC illegal under antitrust law?
23. But isn't PC security a good thing?

Et notamment le 23.

"Similarly, if you want to do DRM on a PC then you need to treat the 
user as the enemy. Seen in these terms, TC does not so much provide 
security for the user as for the PC vendor, the software supplier, and 
the content industry. They do not add value for the user, but destroy 
it. They constrain what you can do with your PC in order to enable 
application and service vendors to extract more money from you. This is 
the classic definition of an exploitative cartel - an industry agreement 
that changes the terms of trade so as to diminish consumer surplus. (..)"

25. So a `Trusted Computer' is a computer that can break my security?
That's a polite way of putting it.

;)



---
Xavier Roche
roche at httrack dot com