> ... because the law is fucking dumb, and my rights matter more. If they aren't _everybody's_ rights then they aren't really your rights either. They are at b

> ... because the law is fucking dumb, and my rights matter more. If they aren't _everybody's_ rights then they aren't really your rights either. They are at best a privilege, and at worst something you have just been able to get away with (so far). > The law can ban E2EE, cryptocurrencies, and privacy, but so long as we have some degree of technical freedom we can and will give it the middle finger. Sure, in that scenario techies can secretly give it the middle finger right up until the authoritarian government they idly watched grow notices them. If someone is seriously concerned about that happening, they could always consider trying to divert the government away from such disaster by participating. > When the governments of the world demand that Apple become an arm of the dystopia, Apple will comply, and its users will have no choice but to go along with it. Government demands of this sort are normally referred to as legal and regulatory compliance. Corporations, which are a legal concept allowed by the government, generally have to conform to continue to exist. > Apple, knowing that it is a private company completely and utterly incapable of resisting serious government demands (ie GCBD in China) should never have developed this capability to begin with. IMHO, having some portion of a pre-existing capability doesn't matter when you aren't legally allowed to challenge the request or answer "no".