[OkayPhysicist]

I can definitely see how instead of viewing a device as an extension of a suspect's mind, you can view it as just another piece of property. If you had a dairy noting where you buried the bodies, or some receipts for your illicit arms deals, locked in a closet somewhere, the cops could reasonably break in and search it, or more relevantly compel you to hand over the key.

Now, I definitely prefer the US's stance of a password being illegal self-discrimination, but I don't think it's unreasonable to have built legal precedent around that other view.

[beezle]

Suppose the hypothetical diary were itself encrypted? And what if it was done with a one-time pad?

[kevviiinn]

If you hand wrote diary entries in an encrypted scheme, could police compel you to decrypt it?

[southernplaces7]

I think you meant diary. Unless you really are referring to a dairy farm filled with buried bodies, nourishing all that grass with their putrescence, which then distills into delicious milk for hungry people...

[ddalex]

How many cycles does a molecule of protein need to go through to be acceptable for human consumption?

[sdfghswe]

> Now, I definitely prefer the US's stance of a password being illegal self-discrimination

Is that true though? Never heard that before.

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

It's somewhat up in the air. The prevailing theory is that the 5th protects against compelling what amounts to testimony... but it's only been tested a few times in court, never by SCOTUS. With mixed results.

[sdfghswe]

Is there a way I can learn more about this? A resource for non-lawyers.

[P_I_Staker]

btw, I think OP meant incrimination

[sdfghswe]

I understood what he meant, and in fact I even missed the typo until you pointed it out.