I think this is a good philosophical debate that needs to be explored, however I am not sure how I see the safe argument as a poor analog. On one hand the arti

I think this is a good philosophical debate that needs to be explored, however I am not sure how I see the safe argument as a poor analog. On one hand the article proposes that writing something down on paper is an extension of the mind, yet does not even mention the obvious situation that must occur on a regular basis of confidential papers in a safe. These are admissible correct? I still am searching for something new about smartphone vs older technology such as safes and paper, which must have hundreds of years of legal precedent to reference. Even the idea that the safe destroys it's contents if tampered with is not new (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptex).