>>11868549 (pb)

>See the part where I said that it is possible (and actually pretty easy) to make a secure hardware design with insecure hardware.

>Learn electronics.

Again, why the fuck should I trust you or whoever makes that hardware?

How do you verify that a microchip does exactly as the documentation says as a normal citizen and there are no secret opcodes or security issues on it?

You don't, because it's impossible.

You trust some nonsense expert. Or you yourself LARP as an expert pretending to know.

 

>Software is WAY harder.

Software is even inside your microchips.

Learn computing.

Learn how machine code works.

Learn how CPUs work.

There are so many ways to hack computers.

And you want to build one that is impossible to hack from the outside as well as from the inside. Hah

Weird that console manufacturers are not capable of doing so.

(inb4 they are adding security flaws in their console intentionally to get them hacked)

 

>They'll have to trust someone.

And that isn't a problem?

WHY THE FUCK SHOULD I TRUST YOU saying that your hardware is secure, when I can not verify it by myself?

>Intel bad, do not trust them

>Trust me, when I say this hardware is totally secure

 

The government has trillions of dollars and is way more powerful than you.

 

Why the fuck would I want elections to be done using your computer when it's impossible to make sure it isn't hacked, tampered with and actually doing the job it's supposed to do?

 

The intelligent thing to do is not to use computers in the first place.

 

You can even tamper with compilers, you could in theory create your so called safe programming environment and the compiler itself adds security holes and you could even do that in a way so that people can not figure them out.

How the fuck do you verify that the compiler does exactly what it's supposed to do? Do you use a magnifying glass on the memory?

Or do you trust some tools once again.

Do you trust hardware telling you that the hardware has not been modified?

See how silly this is?

 

At some point it's impossible to verify and you have experts telling you to trust in thing, which is a stupid thing to do.

 

Again: why the fuck would I trust you or some company? You can not verify that something is 100% secure and not hacked. It's impossible. If you had in depth knowledge about computers, you would know that.

 

In the end it's always about trust, and trust is bad when things are really really important like election integrity for example.

 

You wouldn't even be capable of verifying every single source code change of one single large open source project.

 

>Asshat

Now you won the argument by using insults.

Oh wait, no you don't.