
5 ways tech companies distort the encryption debate - joeyespo
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/in-theory/wp/2015/12/15/5-things-tech-companies-dont-understand-about-encryption/
======
JoshTriplett
Every word in this article is utter nonsense, and yet the Washington Post gave
it a platform. _This is being treated as a serious debate_ , with _sides_ and
_perspectives_ , and nobody is laughing these people off the stage. And if we
engage with such arguments in the slightest, or give them the slightest bit of
credibility, we're taking a serious risk of allowing an Overton window
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window)).

There are issues with sides. This is not one of them. There is no middle
ground on this issue; there is "broken" and "not broken". "Privacy" and
"security" do not mean "except from the government" or "except for the company
selling the device". And it doesn't matter whether a search is _lawful_ ; if
it is _possible_ without the consent of the owner, the device has a critical
security bug.

A court can determine a search is _lawful_ all they like; that gives them the
right to perform the search. You've got a warrant? Here's the device, go right
ahead. No, I don't want it back; I have backups.

Governments wonder why technologists want to make it impossible to comply with
their demands, and protect users even from themselves? Because their demands
look like _this_ and we're tired of losing.

How do we reach a point where people like this get laughed off the stage, the
way they would if they talked about how much simpler maps would be for a flat
earth? How do we not just "win" this "debate" but prevent every future such
"debate"?

How do we stop losing? How do we end the fight completely and permanently?

