Yes, it's definitely controversial but I think a little bit of insecurity is a good thing but not too much -- the question is how much. Consider that had the NSA been far more secure in their processes, the whole Snowden thing may have never happened... which is somewhat ironic.
> Freedom should be achieved in different ways. Please don't make freedom and security contradictions.
In an ideal world, they wouldn't be. Unfortunately that's not how it is in reality.
To play a devil's advocate, I want to answer this directly as answered.
Available information indicates that NSA used various coercion tactics to ensure cooperation from various companies and that it has the methods to ensure hardware modifications in its own interests.
So the damage to NSA from improving security too much is less than damage to my ability to use the computing device I have paid for as an actual computing device.
Of course we should also consider smaller threats.
But the better the platform is locked down, the less limitations there ae for advertiser-friendly platform design, which makes people expect a lot of permissions requested by applications, so phishing and trojans become easier.
The problem here is about the effects of scale: it is hard to produce just a few thousands phones with good specs.
That freedom also means I have the freedom to modify my device after exploiting it in order to remove those exploits. On the other hand, a device that is completely unexploitable due to being written in a strongly safe language, would mean I no longer have that freedom - and while it may be unexploitable to everyone else, I'm pretty sure the NSA has its ways to get in anyway; if it does, then there's no escape.
I've never said that freedom is about consistency. Opinions should be consistent if they are to be taken seriously.
This guy wants to intentionally leave software exploitable, ready to be unknowingly hacked by criminals or governments, and call it freedom. And he gets upvoted for it!
> Freedom should be achieved in different ways. Please don't make freedom and security contradictions.
In an ideal world, they wouldn't be. Unfortunately that's not how it is in reality.