I agree, but Gates has to know that on balance e2e encryption is better than not. I too feel the same frustration to a much lesser degree when talking to family members.
No, he doesn't have to know that. There is a deep divide on that question; it only seems like there isn't because this particular bubble we're in is essentially unified on it. That's not true of the wider world.
I find it impossible to argue against encryption. People should have the tools to do things secretly. If you want to prevent all the bad things Bill talked about, attack those things, not the tools.
IIRC the argument is basically that as tech progresses it will get easier and easier for any one person to destroy the planet. According to Bostrom the only way to prevent that is no secrets and ubiquitous surveillance.
None of what he said is correct and even if it was, it would be easier to destroy every piece of technology on earth than put collars around people to monitor what they do (According to his own idea of destruction, this is doubly true. He thinks destroying humanity can happen very easily so why can't it be easy to destroy devices?). I have trouble trusting this guy, and it's hard to resist calling him names. So I think I'm still going to argue that you cannot argue against encryption.