At a social level we should know how to do this well because there are cases where it needs to be done well. Some hardware is operating in incredibly safety critical scenarios where you do want to have strong confidence that it's running the correct software[1].

Should this be shipped to consumers as a default? Fuck no. This technology needs to exist for safety, but that doesn't mean it should be used to prop up business models. Unfortunately there's no good technical mechanism to prevent technology being used in user-hostile ways, and we're left with social pressure. We should be organising around that social pressure rather than refusing to talk about the tech.

[1] and let's not even focus on the "Someone hacked it" situation - what if it accidentally shipped with an uncertified debug build? This seems implausible, but when Apple investigated the firmware they'd shipped on laptops they found that some machines had been pulled off the production line, had a debug build installed to validate something, and had then been put back on the production line without a legitimate build being installed - and if Apple can get this wrong, everyone can get this wrong

I think Apple is time and again proof that Tivoization is highly effective, and that if we want to fight it, the fight needs to be legal, not technical, as much as that may dismay the technically inclined.

Agreed. I'm rooting for the continued failure of everyone who locks down hardware (and software) to prevent its users from modifying or fully controlling it.