| > First, child protection is paramount Can you name one authoritarian regime in which child safety has been a priority? If anything the impunity of those at the top has made child trafficking worse. Your position risks giving a massive amount of power to people who have already demonstrated they can't be trusted with it, let alone with kids. Don't assume privacy activists don't care about children. > Second, The erosion of big tech companies' power is a benefit as far as I can see. Big tech can't read E2E communications either. This won't reduce their power. > Third, We still have effective encryption in our hands. TLS is not going to be broken by this. Effective against whom? If it's the authorities you don't trust then TLS is already useless. Seriously, the UK is the home of the coverup. Sir Cyril Smith, Sir Jimmy Saville, Sir Peter Morrison, Sir Peter Hayman, Stuart Hall OBE, Rolf Harris CBE. All of them connected enough to 'put in a call to someone' and in many cases, shown to have received some police or official support. Your system sucks but you trust these people enough to give them more power? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westminster_paedophile_dossier https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-abuse-idUSKBN20J1... https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/25/police-and-p... |