> A lot of professionals perfectly understood the idea. I saw very little evidence of that. Practically everybody against the idea thought the device determine

> A lot of professionals perfectly understood the idea. I saw very little evidence of that. Practically everybody against the idea thought the device determined what was a match and uploaded evidence to Apple. Practically everybody against the idea thought “the” hash was broken. Practically everybody against the idea confused a hash false positive with the system’s false positive. Yes, there were a few thoughtful criticisms and I would have liked to have seen more of them. But they were drowned out by abject nonsense. > given how they paraded their backdoor approach as a way to eat their cake and have it too, it's unsurprising that it attracted the attention of governments. It didn’t though? Has there been any government who wanted to take that system up? They all want something a lot more intrusive; the same kinds of things they have been asking for a long time before Apple’s proposal.