I do not support mandating those things by law.

I am content with letting the Linux people do their thing while I do my thing.

The only people I've only thought wanted to outlaw something are the most extreme Linux/GNU zealots who want to make it illegal for a company to lock down a computer even if it improves the user experience.

It stands to reason that such zealots exist on the other side of the argument as well, but I've never encountered them.

I didn't believe you would, but I fear it's a likely outcome if all that 99% of people ever use is a locked down system. Then misguided (or bribed) lawmakers will almost certainly start getting ideas about banning unlimited computers because "they're only used by hackers and pirates" or "because security" or something.

"I am content with letting the Linux people do their thing while I do my thing."

The problem is that when it becomes too niche, it will be banned out of course. ("Do you have any idea what people can DO with those things??")

Remember, encryption was a munition and controlled accordingly. The need for secure banking is about the only reason we're allowed that. That, and the efforts of people who demand ownership over their machines (or at least something close to it)