On Sun, 12 Jun 2016 12:43:55 +0000, Stephanie wrote in message
<CAB9zhUuJDD0ybA7AFNTbyNqsJu3kSnJJqRtXeabAL7q2tLZGGw@???>:

> In most cases right now, we have either the option to disable secure
> boot, or there is a version of GRUB that is signed, therefore
> permitting booting into other operating systems. For right now,
> investigate before buying to make sure you have the option to boot
> your operating system of choice.
>
> At some point though, as those options start to go away, we will
> probably have to fight this in the courts under grounds that it is an
> anti-competitive process.

..I spent 11 years with Groklaw, 5 before the "post"-Groklaw Kafka show
took off on me, the Norwegian government acts as if they believe I was
an important and dangerous leader in Groklaw.net, maybe because I did
suggest the "MS Litigation" left menu item and recommend PJ listen to
her own gut feelings on her Linux Foundation(?) board resignation.
IME Edward Snowdon is safer in Putin's Moscow.

..we sort of "won" over the Microsoft shills in the courts in Utah
and Delaware, but now we are "escaping" systemd and being shut down
by Microsoft "secure" boot loader and kernel signatures.


..how's Slackware doing, can we use them as our upstream instead of
Debian? The easy bit is convert their packages to .deb.


> Searching for, and advocating for motherboards that support coreboot
> is another important strategy, because only when free firmware is
> available can we be sure there will be no dirty tricks.
>
> On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 7:52 AM Adam Borowski <kilobyte@???>
> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 12:21:14PM +0100, KatolaZ wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 06:35:11AM -0400, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> > > > How *do* we deal with secure boot? I am terrified of buying a
> > > > new machine because I'm afraid I won't get to install anything
> > > > on it wxcept for an OS from one of the big companies that have
> > > > sweetheart deals with Microsoft.
> > >
> > > I think that so far secure boot can be disabled. I confirm I was
> > > able to disable it in my laptop. This does not mean that it would
> > > be optional forever, though.
> >
> > The ability to disable secure boot was a requirement for the
> > Windows 8 Logo program (obviously to stave off accusations from the
> > EU). It is gone for Windows 10 Logo, and thus you can expect
> > hardware vendors to drop it -- such
> > features cause development and support costs. This would be the
> > case even with no underhanded policies, and know that "no
> > underhanded policies" goes strictly against Microsoft volume
> > licensing policy.


--
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
Scenarios always come in sets of three:
best case, worst case, and just in case.