nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyd968gmewwp6kyqpq04e6xt23sdp5z9nlfv9cukey28ahtzjsrewuwjqv9v7y89tjqj4q3jwuv3 Apologies, I didn't mean to put words in your mouth.
@nprofile1q...
Apology accepted.
My argument is that pervasive surveillance is one of probably only two options the tech-bros have left for the law-makers.
The other option I can see, would be to regulate cryptography like other "dangerous" technologies such as weapons, electricity and cars, with licensing, compliance, certification and most likely mandatory key-retention to respond to court orders.
Both are utterly horrible results, but that's what you get for not reading Clausewitz.
Apology accepted.
My argument is that pervasive surveillance is one of probably only two options the tech-bros have left for the law-makers.
The other option I can see, would be to regulate cryptography like other "dangerous" technologies such as weapons, electricity and cars, with licensing, compliance, certification and most likely mandatory key-retention to respond to court orders.
Both are utterly horrible results, but that's what you get for not reading Clausewitz.