> What I see is that if evidence collection becomes seriously hampered because of strong encryption, then hacking, backdoors and surveillance will have to go up

> What I see is that if evidence collection becomes seriously hampered because of strong encryption, then hacking, backdoors and surveillance will have to go up to compensate, and that's not a good situation either. I don't see why it should. Encryption isn't taking something away that the government has always had, it's about taking something back that they never should have been collecting in the first place, and evidently don't know how to use properly anyway. Just because we've taken away their new toys doesn't mean they get to continue to abuse the system. > Maybe we just haven't seen the actual consequences yet. Really? I've been pretty civil with this, despite my inclination that you are just trolling, but I can't even take this part seriously. > Unless the FBI and the police are lying Either they are being malicious, or they are being ignorant. I'm not sure which is worse. But we have plenty of evidence that they are and have been lying. You keep framing this discussion as though it's reasonable they are the good guys looking out for everyone, but there's just too much evidence that this isn't the case. EDIT: > 650 of 5,000 electronic devices investigators attempted to search over the last 10 months How many conversations about crimes were had in private that they couldn't record? I'm guessing many more than 5,000. Does that mean we should ban non-transcribed conversations?