Don't like it? Go into your BIOS and turn it off.

Most computer users don't know what a BIOS even is, let alone how to get into it.

It's not that simple. Many users don't know what UEFI or Restricted Boot are. If they see a Certified for Windows 8 logo on a computer when they're buying it, they don't know that means extra restrictions for them.

Not everybody cares about computers, which is why Restricted Boot is so bad.

Richard's story, The Right To Read, has already sort of predicted this move.

But not only were [free operating systems] illegal, like debuggers—you could not install one if you had one, without knowing your computer's root password. And neither the FBI nor Microsoft Support would tell you that.

Despite what people say about Restricted Boot, it opens up the world of computers to a whole new set of attacks... by megacorporations like Microsoft.

Some of those things mentioned in TFA aren't software, so I'm not sure the term "open source" even applies. H.264 is not software, but there is Free software that supports it. The issue regarding H.264 is freedom, because it is encumbered by software patents.

Perhaps relevant:
http://stallman.org/stallman-computing.html

... However, if I am visiting somewhere and the machines available nearby happen to contain non-free software, through no doing of mine, I don't refuse to touch them.
...
Likewise, I don't need to worry about what software is in a kiosk, pay phone, or ATM that I am using. I hope their owners migrate them to free software, for their sake, but there's no need for me to refuse to touch them until then.

On a side note, will this person be using Free BIOS and Free firmware? RMS uses a Lemote computer (MIPS) in order to achieve this. Also, his website linked to Vimeo, which requires non-free JavaScript in order to run.

(replace "Free" with "open source" if you prefer that term)

How can you expect to have control of your computing, if your company uses proprietary operating systems and doesn't let you control it? SSL/TLS snooping is the least of your problems; if they own the computer and they're in control, they can spy on you anyway.

As a rule I avoid computers I don't own whenever possible. I only use such computers for trivial tasks, or perhaps work if I can't use my own. If I don't own the computer or if it has proprietary software on it, I immediately assume I'm being spied on.

Yes, because we all know Microsoft invented the smartphone... wait, what?

Because we can all see how important Microsoft's smartphone inventions have been to the public, by the success of their phones. </sarcasm>

I hope Dell puts in a decent wireless card, that works in all GNU/Linux distributions. My current Dell laptop has an Intel WiFi card and it sucks. I have to use non-free firmware and even on Windows it behaves weird.

One of these would be great: Realtek, Ralink, Amtel, ADMTek, Atheros.

Switching directly to GNU/Linux seems to cause too many compatibility problems. I spent a year dealing with mostly free software on my Windows computer. Switching to GNU/Linux was a breeze.

Half the time I think people hate GNU/Linux so much because it's so different to what they're used to.

I still have Windows in a Virtual Machine in case I need to get Windows compatible, although I don't use it that often. (I also have my old Win partition dual-booted, but I don't use it)

Android is 100% open source.

Last time I checked Android contains a lot of proprietary software, including drivers. That's the main reason why the FSF does not approve of it.

That is fine, but Apple is perfectly within their rights to stick with GPL2, which protects their Freedom Zero rights as originally outlined by RMS.

Sorry, am I missing something? I didn't know Apple used the GPLv2?

As time went on, FSF decided they didn't like Freedom Zero anymore. Users like Apple were using the software the "wrong way" by not contributing to FSF community ecosystem, danceline, and parade floats. So they rewrote the license to restrict Freedom Zero rights... now you can't run software unless I can run it too.

That is incorrect. You do not have to accept the terms of the GPL to run the program alone. Let me cite the GPLv3 itself:

You are not required to accept this License in order to receive or run a copy of the Program.