|
|
|
|
|
by noodlesoups
2093 days ago
|
|
>but this isn't malevolence. It's fear and lack of competence. I'm not sure which is worse. We absolutely need people with the expertise in the area to make these kinds of decision. It's like giving a gardener the position to launch nukes. I'm sure they're very capable at trimming bushes, but that isn't exactly useful here. e2e is really not a must-have in crime. It's a nice-to-have, but people can and often do very well without it. If we aren't capable of catching the lowest hanging fruit, how is this even of any use? At the same time we're not giving out the right signal about the state of surveillance already in place by not utilizing it to it's maximum potential. Power corrupts, and the effects can be seen all over. Imagine what absolute power does |
|
This pretty much solves a very serious problem for all illicit activity - secure communications. It's strange to argue that this ought to have no impact on the ability of law enforcement to combat organized crime or terrorism because they should just compensate elsewhere. That's waiving a problem away instead of facing up to it. Of course it's having a big impact, and telling them 'just be better elsewhere' is not gonna work, they'll still push for stupid legislation.