zlacker

>>donoho+(OP)
I think there is a point to this. I’m not saying I’m a fan. But the reality is that it is too simple to communicate secretly, and the government has an interest in protecting its citizens. This is true in many aspects. (Health, technology, electronics, traffic)

Btw. The https communication comparison does not hold, there is always a third party that can read what you say. E2E chats are effectively communication where evidence is instantly destroyed.

Want to have a private communication, I think offline is the right approach.

I agree that it sucks, but it’s probably not about you. It’s about nefarious people that use this as an uber advantage.

>>LunicL+B9

   But the reality is that it is too simple to communicate secretly

This is a horrifying thought to be reading on this site of all places, and I can't help but feel that humanity is well and truly screwed if this mentality has seeped this far into the culture. *Communicating secretly is a human right*. A legal right under international law (ICCPR article 17, ECHR article 8), and a constitutional right in any country worth living in. There can not possibly be such a thing as "too simple to exercise your human right to privacy". It's like asserting that it is too simple to choose your line of work, or that it is too simple to live in the city of your choosing.

  and the government has an interest in protecting its citizens

The government has more than an interest, it has a legal obligation to protecting the human rights of its citizens.