Is calling anyone who disagrees with you a "corporate mouthpiece" similar to how some people argue anyone who doesn't say "ACAB" is a boot licker?
Here's my personal take: No one is forced to use remote attestation merely to use their device. It's only if you want to use some other service. So - if you don't want to play by the requirements of the service, then just don't use the service? It seems pretty simple. There's a country club that I want to eat in, but they require me to wear a suit jacket. I don't want to wear a suit jacket - so what do I do? Simply not eat at that country club and go get food somewhere else that doesn't require a suit jacket, or do I start a PR campaign about how evil suit jackets are, and call anyone who doesn't mind wearing a suit jacket a shill for Big Golf?
Here's my personal take: No one is forced to use remote attestation merely to use their device. It's only if you want to use some other service. So - if you don't want to play by the requirements of the service, then just don't use the service? It seems pretty simple. There's a country club that I want to eat in, but they require me to wear a suit jacket. I don't want to wear a suit jacket - so what do I do? Simply not eat at that country club and go get food somewhere else that doesn't require a suit jacket, or do I start a PR campaign about how evil suit jackets are, and call anyone who doesn't mind wearing a suit jacket a shill for Big Golf?