If you're fully aware of the possible consequences of ignoring those policies then go wild. I think it's the wrong choice for most people, and as I said I think it's irresponsible to suggest people change the thermal policy in that way without ensuring they're aware of the possible consequences. If saying "You should only do this if you're ok with your laptop potentially becoming hot enough to burn human skin" is authoritarian then I guess I'm authoritarian?
Also, why is Intel so reluctant on fixing this themselves? It looks so simple to me too fix this by releasing the docs and fixing thermald, and still, here we are having to use throttled for those wanting a little bit more punch.
And finally, how is it that nobody it's creating a custom, patched thermald that takes all this into account? Is it that the process for reverse engineering is too complicated and that we don't have the full picture yet? It shouldn't be too difficult to read the values Windows takes and reverse engineer it, although it may be tougher than it seems at first.
FWIW, the incidence of people burning themselves on hot pads / body warmers would strongly suggest otherwise:
https://www.hmpgloballearningnetwork.com/site/wounds/reviews...
That's not evidence, that's just theory. I'm asking for ACTUAL EVIDENCE of people who got burned by their laptops after disabling DPTF or using ThrottleStop, because I haven't found any. And assuming that humans won't have a natural "this is hot, better not touch it" response is absurd.
But recommending the latter without providing any information about the tradeoffs is irresponsible.
Clearly, common sense is not something you and the rest of the authoritarians in Big Tech want, because you'd rather be paternalistic control-freaks. Pulling out the tired "safety" argument only shows your commitment to that.