Joseph Cox

Well, now we know.

This is literally the case.

It actually happened.

So if we can digest this and we can figure out, okay, now do we want authorities to read all encrypted messages or not?

And personally, there are like three options I see in front of me.

The first is that secure apps give more data to the authorities.

You know, oh, you send a subpoena to Signal, they give information about the user.

That's pretty problematic because that could be very easily abused for various reasons and it would undermine the security of the apps.

Okay, sure.

you have the second one which is like well let's just run the apps and get all of the messages on it like they did with nom which obviously to me is insane compromising entire communication platform you then have something else which i believe ben i know people will disagree with me

there is another option of targeted hacking.

You have malware that can be delivered to a specific device, to a specific user, and harvest only a small particular amount of information which is allowed under that country's or agency's laws or whatever.

If those are the three options, I would take the hacking one just because it's the less bad out of all of those.

And some people will come forward and say, why do you have to pick one?

And I think it's because the status quo is just not sustainable.

We had the status quo for ages, and then the FBI decided to run its own tech company.

That's what happens when there's a status quo.

They'll keep doing these crazy brazen operations.

Do you want them to do that, or do you want them to do something less invasive?

Yeah, and there's a lot of nuance to it in that, you know, the FBI will have an exploit to get into an iPhone, and that will allow them into it.