It took me way too long to realize, but I've now realized the current aims of the proprietary 計画 (note keikaku means plan).

The plan is to enforce "remote attestation" combined with "cloud computing" in the name of "security".


The whole idea of "cloud computing" is that the suckers mind is clouded to such an extent that they don't realise that they're renting monthly someone else's computer for a huge markup: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.en.html

That server typically happens to run mostly free software (but always some proprietary software as well), but for the sucker, such setup somehow manages to combine the security of proprietary software with the privacy of proprietary software.

SaaSS provides zero privacy or security against the hosts, as the hosts can just look at what the software is doing.

Sadly, the same level of security and privacy exists against sufficiently skilled internal and external attackers (theoretically the server would be well maintained and kept up to date (spoiler; this usually doesn't happen), thus keeping out attackers, but that much valuable information concentrated in one place is going to attract very skilled crackers, so, even if the server is actually very secure, those crackers are going to pull off an incredible attack to get what they want).


As the proprietary masters have finally realized that it's futile to put a complete stop to hardware and software attacks that force computing hardware and software to partially serve the user instead of them - so they've decided to try to turn "computers" into glorified thin clients, where most of the information is stored on a remote server, with the client cryptographically authenticating with the most proprietary of "attestation" hardware before any information is sent as needed.

Such functionality is extremely useful for proprietary aims, for example: video streaming, anti-cheat, lock-in word processing, restricted communication and everything else needed to give profit and prevent wrongthink.

For video streaming, remote attestation will be useful to prevent unauthorized copying after the fact, by linking a specific device to a specific person and watermarking any video stream served.

While some people are going to figure out how to break the digital handcuffs to get the video stream for sharing, a watermark will ideally allow for the sharer to be identified, the per-device key revoked to prevent further sharing (or access to any remote server) and the sharer to be arrested (the arrest part may not even be needed in the distant, but potential future where not being able to use specific electronic devices will be functionally worse than being imprisoned).


Such will also stop those pesky free software programmers from reverse engineering proprietary file formats and writing a replacement free program that can view and edit such files - as the actual files will only every be sent if there's a cryptographic proof that all the software running on the computer is proprietary

I could keep going, but that's enough examples - but I'm sure you can think of plenty of examples yourself.



I've just realized that such functionality has already been implemented on almost all newer tracking devices and will eventually reach 100% once connecting to the mobile tower requires "remote attestation"...wait, that's all of them considering the IMEI "feature", although the restrictive features haven't yet been perfected (thankfully not having a tracking device is still possible, or at least one that's slightly less bad, but there's a cycle where the older mobile protocols are shut down (like GSM) and only being used by newer, progressively more proprietary devices is possible).


"Apple" has managed to pull it off with all their tracking devices and their "mac" devices with the "T2" "security" chip.

"Google" has done the same with their tracking devices and chromebooks.

"Microsoft" have tried it early with "Palladium" and had to back off for 10-20 years, before trying again with "Pluton" and "Windows 11".

The main obstacle to the proprietary implementation seems to be legacy support and the amount of hardware that lacks good enough sabotage processors, but the proprietary software developers are slowly toiling away at it.


Eventually, all necessary hardware will make its way into the hands of 100% of normies, who will gleefully accept any "security" improvements, just as long as whatever things they want to do is convenient and you'll soon be unable to connect to the internet with an unapproved device, for "security"!


Get ready for proprietary software tyranny to be unavoidably implemented in a way that makes the worst parts of 1984 and brave new world look pleasant.

I will try to resist, but there's one of me and billions of normies that would love the tyranny.