[DavidSJ]

Not generally, but there shouldn’t be government microphones preemptively planted in everyone’s home, Stasi style, just waiting for a warrant either.

It’s one thing to have the ability to wiretap selectively and with some cost which makes it prohibitive to do on a massive scale; it’s another thing to require vendors and service providers to deliberately sabotage their customers’ products for them.

I mean there’s just potential for rampant abuse here. What of the right of political dissidents or other persecuted minorities to communicate safely? What of the possibility that this could be used to target a politician’s political adversaries (the way we see frequent mention of today)? There’s a whole history of abuse here, in the US and across the world, and there’s no need to facilitate the potential for such abuse on a scale we’ve never seen before.

[StavrosK]

Right, but the article, top comment, and my comment talk about one thing, and your response is about something completely different. That's a frustrating way to conduct discourse.

[DavidSJ]

You’re right, I didn’t read the context carefully enough.