I'm not arguing about the subpoena, I'm arguing against the idea that encrypted solutions are bad. If you have a subpoena to open a safe, and you realize that

I'm not arguing about the subpoena, I'm arguing against the idea that encrypted solutions are bad. If you have a subpoena to open a safe, and you realize that you have no tools that are strong enough to open that safe, you don't suddenly blame safes. You don't tell banks they should stop using safes. You don't ask them to create weaker safes robbers can break into. You try another route. A subpoena is fair. Asking signal to preemptively not encrypt the data in case we need it later is not.