[stcredzero]

governments are guaranteed to break their own laws whenever it's most convenient for them...It needs security so pointlessly difficult to break through that it'd be cheaper and easier to do analog surveillance.

In that case, you also need "altruistic DRM" -- otherwise private data gets into the wrong hands and bad actors do with it what they will. You're sounding like a loud disagreement in tone, but the words themselves actually spell out strong support for my idea.

[whythehellnot]

What does DRM have over strong cryptography that does not require good actors in order to work?

Besides, so long so there is government, there can be no useful good actors unless they're untouchable trillionaires that are above the law.

[gress]

You seem to have a binary view of who is a good actor or not.

Are you a good actor, and if so, how do you know?

[whythehellnot]

I'll admit that I didn't think of a potentially DRM linchpin good actor that hides from the government and is as untouchable as the incorruptible trillionaire. The reason I think this way is that I'm sure that unless you're a radical/extremist in your principals, your vulnerable to exploitation from authorities and anyone who is a bad actor more powerful than they are.

Which probably also tells you that I think people are generally bad actors by nature. Due to greed & a lack of integrity when endowed with a position of power. Any systems designed with the notion that people are generally good actors tend to be exploited and corrupted over time.

"Are you a good actor, and if so, how do you know?"

Perhaps? I can't know that because I've never been in such a position that would reveal my lesser traits. I've never been given into logical fallacies under pressure from multitudes of bad actors that would love to see me fail so they could get what they want. Which is why I've commented before on why I think the government should be designed in a way that forces bad actors to be good actors by encouraging them to follow their natural instincts to be positively selfish instead of negatively.