Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD Is Hiring For Coreboot Development, Sponsoring Open-Source Firmware Conference

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by madscientist159 View Post

    I have a construction hammer that I keep in my garage. Unless someone steals that hammer by breaking into my garage, I do believe I am the only one that can control that hammer, unless I decide to grant (exercising my control) the ability to use the hammer to another person. It's not going to leap out of my tool bucket and start pounding dents into my car, or decide that today I will not be able to use it and fuse itself into to the concrete. It is about as perfectly under my sole control as anything can be.

    Before the DMCA and these modern concepts of firmware, in fact everything was by default perfectly under the control of its owner. Your shades of grey only started to come into play when people blurred the line between ownership and rental to save money. Trying to say that is the only option now, especially with open ISA systems growing rapidly, is laughable and smacks of desperation to justify an AMD CPU purchase.
    It's the damn Jedi with their soft ways. Piece is a lie! Only power/control can set you free!

    Comment


    • #62
      Great.

      Now if this would be of use to re-activate the PCI Express 4.0 thing on X470 boards that AMD banned ...

      Oh wait! It's AMD!

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by DebianLinuxero View Post
        Great.

        Now if this would be of use to re-activate the PCI Express 4.0 thing on X470 boards that AMD banned ...

        Oh wait! It's AMD!
        This is a great time to highlight the difference between a fully owner controlled, open source firmware (like the OpenPOWER firmware stack or libreboot) and an open framework around vendor binaries such as coreboot.

        With the former, you can decide to override the vendor if you want. With the latter (e.g. modern x86 coreboot) you'll probably find the whitelist in some signed binary (likely BinaryPI in this case) that you can't touch.

        Comment

        Working...
        X