>>"Pipe down. We all know what the intention of requiring secured boot is. No, it's not to reduce the risk of root kits."
So you say the purpose of Secure Boot is not to secure against malware, despite the fact that there is existing malware that it secures against. And you insist that the purpose is to lock people out despite the fact that it doesn't.
Could you come up with anything more wrong-headed than this? Yes, apparently you can -
>>The good side effect of it is there's a barrier to entry for Linux users. That means less idiots - which is a good thing!
You would actually wish to discourage people from GNU/Linux to prop up your sense of elitism! That's disgusting. Fortunately for those less obnoxious, I can't imagine any would-be user being stopped. If your sense of elitism is calibrated so low that you think entering the BIOS makes you part of a superior group, there are some people around here who would blow your mind.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
