>But the argument doesn't even make sense. It makes the horrible assumption that pedophiles will continue using a service they know to be insecure. That's liter

>But the argument doesn't even make sense. It makes the horrible assumption that pedophiles will continue using a service they know to be insecure. That's literally a provably false assumption. The second they realize it's insecure (which will take exactly one raid), they'll switch to something else. It's not an assumption at all. The fact that people engaged in child pornohraphy have had decrypted communications used against them in court demonstrates this to be true. Ephemeral conversation is not new and implicit in a right to privacy assuming it extends beyond your actual corpus. The only way I understand your arguments to be a justification to break encryption is if you believe we should not have freedom to share privately.