> You will perhaps agree that encryption has the potential to directly harm people just as physics or chemistry? I would not agree. Encryption can only indirectly harm people, in the same vein as speech.
It's more like saying if you draw a picture of a car going 80mph, that's just a drawing. Doing physics or chemistry can directly harm people. Doing math or drawing pictures can't.
If this were ever to happen, the only people using secure (deniable) cryptography would be be the bad actors. Everyone else would be screwed.
> You will perhaps agree that encryption has the potential to directly harm people just as physics or chemistry? I would not agree. Encryption can only indirectly harm people, in the same vein as speech.
It's more like saying if you draw a picture of a car going 80mph, that's just a drawing. Doing physics or chemistry can directly harm people. Doing math or drawing pictures can't.
If this were ever to happen, the only people using secure (deniable) cryptography would be be the bad actors. Everyone else would be screwed.