> I think there's a huge difference between "take an existing system design, and declare it open" and "design a system in the open". This article isn't suggesting Intel make x86 open to all, for example. You get a completely different design when something is designed behind closed doors as a black-box product, versus designed in the open.

I don't - I believe there are an insufficient number subject matter experts conversant enough in processor design to provide the depth of auditing needed.

I'm not saying openness is good or bad (its usually good) just that its not a panacea here.