| Please read what I am actually writing. I will try a different format. Perhaps you can respond POINT BY POINT to show that you have read it and have a substantive argument about it, rather than about your personal feelings about what a name du jour should mean: 1. End-to-end encrypted communication opens the barn door, you can conceal any anonymous cryptocurrency transactions in there, as well as darknets, smart contracts for silk road, etc. If you allow one, you allow the other. 2. Conversely, as the EFF often points out, making a backdoor in any crypto means effectively backdooring all of it. According to their stance, you either allow all of it, or nothing. (I happen to disagree with that, but there it is.) 3. There are more countries in the world than "America" (you meant USA, I am sure). Many of those countries take a much more dim view of freedom of expression online, than we do here. We need to design our software for people around the world, not just care about the USA. Many people on HN are not in the USA. Here is just a small list of things that currently go wrong when we don't have "unhosted" communication (https://qbix.com/blog/2019/03/08/how-qbix-platform-can-chang...) 4. Contrary to your statement, the USA's courtrooms would not "laugh" the parallels out of the room. I will post just a small sampling of bills with the same intent in spirit, to restrict end-to-end encryption. I want to be clear that this is only the stuff done in the open, and doesn't include the secret actions by the NSA, or agencies that serve national security letters, etc. 4a. The MPAA and RIAA lobbied Congress to implement "reasonable" reporting measures to ban access to many sites that provide end to end encryption: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act 4b. After success in shutting down Craigslist and Backpage sex personals, Congress wanted to go further, and require every site to do this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Enabling_Sex_Traffickers_... 4c. Section 230 protections repeal: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-is-section-230-and-why-do-... 4d. The EARN IT act, just recently: http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2020/01/earn-it-act-how-ba... 4e. LAED act, even more recent: http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2020/06/there%E2%80%99s-no... 4f: Trump's attorney general was vocally against encryption, and lauded the proposed bill banning it: https://apnews.com/article/ny-state-wire-technology-ap-top-n... https://apnews.com/article/ny-state-wire-technology-ap-top-n... PLEASE address 1, 2, 3, and 4a - 4f |
Money laundering is not free speech, and supporting E2EE does not somehow magically mean that I have to support or be okay with burning coal so that people can crack hashes. If you want to argue about cryptography itself, I suggest finding someone who’s actually against privacy and encryption.