They serve as ideal small computers in all sorts of laboratory set-ups. Use them as network line-debuggers, use them as front-end mockups - I just love them!

The excuse that Obama is still busy cleaning up Bush's mess is wearing a bit thin, I suppose.

Ok, let that be a given (albeit one that would raise a few eyebrows at my work) - how do you propose to have a bit of memory that can only be written by the bootloader? Aren't there enough exploits out there that target the BIOS?

You say it yourself: problem with well-tested hash functions is that, without a secret, they are prone to collision attacks. Why and how do you think that the hash-function can be replaced? That is an attack vector in itself!

Except for when the key inside the CPU somehow leaks.

Secure boot is fantastic: the appliances I make require it, and will require it in the years to come. To be able to use run-of-the-mill hardware for my appliances would be great. But I think there's a lot of ignorance of how many ways there are to implement it. And frankly, there is no way to avoid that the way with which appliance makers would be most happy, is also the way with the FSF would be most unhappy: you tinkering with your own hardware, from that perspective, is the same as the American secret service tampering with it, after all. The first is great, the second is the reason secure boot exists, from my perspective.

However, there are less-evil solutions: a switch on the motherboard, for example, to create a read-only bootloader memory or that same switch, allowing you to sign your bootloader. That would require physical access to your computer, which you can cover in other ways (a seal, for example).

Huh? Macs boot nothing but UEFI these days.

Yes, there is an existing problem. Even if YOU don't suffer from it, many people and situations require it. Dismissing it with a hand-wave, as you seem to be doing, is just short-sighted. Yes, vendor lock-in is a potential problem, but otherwise secure boot is a fantastic feature. We need to sit down and agree on how it's implemented.

You already have a treaty. It's called interpol, and Saudi used it last year to have a cartoonist extradited.

No. This is what you have to learn about art. Art doesn't strive to be realistic. It strives to resonate a message with you in a satisfactory manner.

Well it does tend to shrink when it gets colder, doesn't it?

You're doing what annoying people sometimes do at conferences: disguising an overly pompous and wordy opinion as a question. Don't do that.

But only in the US someone would be shown the door for wanting to buy too many things. Because, you know, the US is the birthplace of capitalism and all that.

It's returning though - Damen now build in Romania.

We have the same problem. With an obscure little country called the USA.

Sorry, but the hypocrisy is staggering. We are NOT allowed to even bring an encrypted laptop across US borders.