[JoshTriplett]

We are not required to pick amongst evils. We could, in fact, say private chats are private and end to end encryption is sacrosanct.

[sscaryterry]

If you are purist and you don't live in the real world with real evils. I don't want pedophiles to have privacy.

[john_strinlai]

>I don't want pedophiles to have privacy.

that is why police already have access to mechanisms to remove privacy from people suspected of being a pedophile.

[sscaryterry]

The existing mechanisms are inadequate or not fit for 2026. Hence this discussion.

You are agreeing with me :)

[john_strinlai]

>You are agreeing with me :)

i am absolutely not :)

you want to provide unfettered warrantless access to all of your communications. ive been fighting against that sort of thing for approaching 40 years now.

[sscaryterry]

> have access to mechanisms to remove privacy from people suspected of being a pedophile

I don't understand that part then. You can't break open E2EE by willing it open.

Right now, if I wanted a new account, I walk into any supermarket, spend a quid, and I've got a burner, with WhatsApp.

[john_strinlai]

>I don't understand that part then. You can't break open E2EE by willing it open.

the mechanism to remove privacy from suspects is typically called a warrant.

(end-to-end encryption does not matter if you possess one of the ends)

[BoingBoomTschak]

After Epstein, Hollywood and decades earlier Dutroux, you'd think people like you would have wizened.

For fuck's sake, my country's entire media/intellectual class protected an avowed and even boasting pedophile during his entire life! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabriel_Matzneff

[john_strinlai]

what a crazy turning of the tides to see this comment in the gray.

i suppose the times have changed from when most people on the internet were cypherphunk. now it's common to see people say "i have nothing to hide, please scan all of my communications", unironically invoking "please think of the children".