3 ms·

i don't get how it's an argument for encryption if that wasn't the affected part

• inigyou 4mo ago
  This website posts a lot of nonsense.
  • vrganj 4mo ago
    It's a far right propaganda site masquerading as internet advocacy.
    • inigyou 4mo ago
      Far right? How do you back that belief? As I see it they're just wrong on a lot of stuff.
• Veserv 4mo ago
  Huh? It is a argument against government backdoor access to messages. The government demonstrated that they are unqualified to keep data securely under their control. As such, any argument that a backdoor only allows the duly elected government access is empirically false. Any such backdoor empirically allows nefarious criminals access to your messages whereas the absence of a backdoor keeps your messages safely between you and the other party. So, your options are: 1. Encryption with no backdoors so all messages are safe. 2. Criminals can freely read your messages so the government can more easily investigate potential criminals.