Previously in life I would be completely on the side of the ends not justifying the means, especially with respect to Tails of all things; precisely because it

Previously in life I would be completely on the side of the ends not justifying the means, especially with respect to Tails of all things; precisely because it is billed as a tool for whistleblowers and others trying to extend/preserve democracy. However, recent episodes of Sam Harris' podcast, Making Sense, especially those with Paul Bloom, have changed my mind. The thrust of the argument is that exploiting (especially sexually!) minors is so outrageously heinous that arguments to protect bad actors in situations like this (as a subset of protecting all actors in all situations which is what Tails aims to do) ring hollow. I have almost zero goodwill for Facebook, so with a half-trillion market cap, this is something I would expect from such a company in light of the ethical consideration above: > other companies would not be willing to “[spend] the amount of time and resources to try to limit damage caused by one evil guy.” The takeaway from this for me was what Senator Wyden is quoted as saying to Vice later down: > Did it [the FBI] submit the zero-day for review by the inter-agency Vulnerabilities Equity Processes? If the answer is no, which is how it sounds based on the way he responded, then I agree with you that the FBI-Facebook in cahoots, with the latter's resistance to going after political advertising AT ALL, is worrying.