I think he was referring to trusted platform module (TPM) which can be used for good and not so good purposes. I don't see why Netflix would be interested in controlling your hardware. They have no stake in what happens to video that isn't delivered by them since they aren't the producers and are simply getting paid for being a provider.
Er, no. There are no good purposes for a TPM. See below. And TPM is pretty much equivalent to controlling my hardware, because that's what it's for: providing a way to certifiy to some third party that I've not modified my system, which includes starting from the bootloader and up to the browser I'm running.
TPM already exists and is installed in Intel based computers. Some encryption programs (The kind that keeps others from looking at YOUR stuff) can take advantage of it to increase data throughput. I think the hardware acceleration and being a "black box" are what Netflix is referring to.
Aha, that proves you have no clue what you're talking about. The TPM is in no way an accelerator. It's a slow, cheap chip, that sits on a slow bus. Any acceleration if it exists comes from special CPU instructions, which are completely separate from it. This existed on say, VIA CPUs well before the TPM came into being.
What the TPM is, is a key management device. It provides attestation (for instance, it could be used to prove to Netflix that my system hasn't been modified), and can work as key storage for say, disk encryption. The first is definitely not in my interest, and the second has very limited utility as the only thing it adds is tying disk encryption to a particular device. This is most of the time not in my interest either. Laptop falls and breaks? Say goodbye to your data, because you can't move that disk into a new laptop and type your password. Therefore I avoid any hardware that has a TPM like the plague.
The clue being that he mentions being beneficial for open source software since it wouldn't require some module that may not be compatible with the GPL or other licenses since it is already present in a lot of newer computers.
This goes directly against what the GPL intends to do: make software modifiable by the end user. A TPM is able to certify to a third party that I'm running a RIAA Certified (TM) version of Firefox. That is a perversion. The point of OSS for me is to really modify my software, and not just as some theoretical benefit.
This way Netflix would be able to offer streaming on platforms not currently supported by Silverlight.
Two things.
1. In my opinion, freedom and control of my hardware is more important than what Netflix wants. If lack of DRM is inconvenient to them, that's their problem.
2. The whole argument hinges on the incorrect idea that DRM is an enabler. It's not. Refuse it consistently, and content providers will have to offer content without DRM, as they have with music.