> It's hard to know where to even begin in arguing against this. It's really not. Encryption is all-or-nothing. Either encryption works, or it fails. You can

> It's hard to know where to even begin in arguing against this. It's really not. Encryption is all-or-nothing. Either encryption works, or it fails. You can't pick and choose for whom it will work, and for whom it will fail. So that frames the question, "Who is allowed to use encryption?" This is a dangerous question to be asking, which is why it is hidden behind rhetoric by those who are asking it. Encryption is speech. Anyone can create and use a cypher. Such techniques were invented long before modern computing. Encrypted data is indistinguishable from random data, and possibly even unencrypted data. Encryption is math. Cyphers are mathematical functions, whose derivations are public knowledge. That brings us to the next question: "How?" Either you control speech, or make math secret. Neither option is scalable, and neither option is moral.