Like it or not,outside of tech circles the majority of people think lawful interception should be in place. E2E is fairly new so I doubt it would remain legal f

Like it or not,outside of tech circles the majority of people think lawful interception should be in place. E2E is fairly new so I doubt it would remain legal for a commercial service to offer it. I personally am a fanboy for E2EE. But in democratic countries the majority rule so what could be done aside from educating the majority? The message from the tech industry needs to be very simple and digestable. No going on and on about how you can't backdoor E2EE because that's bad design or implications of letting them have backdoor access,etc.... If it was up to me the counterpoint message would be "Yes, Lawful intercept should be a thing since the people want it but there have been severe violations both by governments and criminals alike where they used existing weakness that allowed lawful intercept for unlawful dragnet surveillance with absolutely no repercussions. Therefore, even if a lawful intercept backdoor was in place, history has shown it will be used for unlawful ends and as such E2EE is merely preventing illegal interception. If the people's will is truly to allow access to their communication then individuals should be forced to install software on endpoints that facilitate interception,much like e911 related software is by law mandated to be installed in a way that is very hard to remove." That said, I hope FB burns!!! (the company,not their people).