Maybe you could do a post on... remote attestation.
That is, the thing that people are actually talking about when they use that term: The means for companies and governments to usurp the ownership of consumer devices.
Grieving parents clamor for laws that will allow surveillance companies to surveil even harder, and for laws that force all people to be subject to their schemes.
Apparently companies can just kill kids to turn parents into their biggest advocates.
The incentives here should probably go in the other direction.
This construction of wind and solar has nothing to do with renewable, and everything to do with China's desire to get as much electricity generation as possible, which involves increasing nuclear, coal, hydro, and everything else.[1]
The ideal is the owner being able to use TPM/SecureBoot/etc to ensure that the device is in the configuration they want. That means resisting tampering, and making any successful tampering become obvious.
The problem is third parties using TPM/SecureBoot/etc as a weapon against the owner via remote attestation, by preventing them from configuring their own device, with the threat of being cut off from critical services.
Having the upside without the downside would be nice, but how could it work? Is a technical solution feasible, or would it need a law/regulation?
Let's not hand-wave field of view. Glasses cannot display anything outside the bounds of their frames, and therefore cannot have a field of view as large as a headset. No amount of miniaturization will overcome that limitation.
Contact lenses having the capability of a headset? That's just magical thinking.
There are several gaps in capability between headsets and glasses, which cannot be filled by any existing technology.
For example, consider field of view, which is a critical measurement of these displays. Typical specs are 120 degrees for headsets, 40 for glasses.
Headsets also perform very high performance rendering compared to glasses. The tiny <1Wh batteries in glasses are insufficient for that amount of work.
Glasses can't be expected to compete with headsets, much less eliminate them from the market entirely within a few years. It makes more sense to think of VR headsets and AR glasses as completely unrelated product categories.
True, and applies to many other things as well. Anyone claiming otherwise is shirking responsibility for their own actions. Every single sibling comment here suffers from this.
Arguments in the form of "other people do it, so I must also" are unpersuasive and pathetic.
That is, the thing that people are actually talking about when they use that term: The means for companies and governments to usurp the ownership of consumer devices.