I think that's a false dichotomy

[Peter Lebbing]

On 04/09/16 03:05, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> I'm transitioning out of my job, where for the last eight years I've
> been doing research and development into digital forensics, mostly for
> government customers.  After eight years I reached the point where I
> began to think that every adult male should just have his clothes
> surgically attached, and at that point it's time to move on to the next
> challenge.

And, with all due respect, for that reason I think policy should not be
determined by people who have been exposed to a very unbalanced amount of
horrible people. Constantly being confronted by the worst scum of the gutter
skews your view of human behaviour.

The same goes for police. Constantly dealing with people who have broken the law
corrupts how you think the majority of people behaves. It's only natural.

Safety and liberty can't both be maximized, it's a trade-off. At the edges of
the spectrum, there are some truly horrendous violations of safety, that in a
just world definitely should not have happened. There truly is no excuse, and
liberty is not an excuse either. But I still think we should strive for that
liberty. Please note, Robert, that I'm not saying you are not striving for
liberty. I see how you argue against weakening encryption in general, and I
applaud you for keeping your back straight despite all the horror you've seen.

My 2 cents,

Peter.

-- 
I use the GNU Privacy Guard (GnuPG) in combination with Enigmail.
You can send me encrypted mail if you want some privacy.
My key is available at <http://digitalbrains.com/2012/openpgp-key-peter>