lets talk about how we don't like encryption bans?

https://archive.is/pALrt

"A law of this nature is a property of an oppressive, Orwellian regime, where ordinary citizens are treated as suspects.

Cameron has made his intentions clear: “We just want to ensure that terrorists do not have a safe space in which to communicate.” That is to say: he wants to destroy all safe spaces to communicate, fundamentally does not want them to exist. For terrorists, or for you. If they aren’t ready to accept even a little bit of danger in exchange for the basic ability to maintain such a fundamental pillar of any evolved society, then what exactly is it that they’re attempting to protect?

Encryption is considered munitions and therefore infringement of its use is unconstitutional.

Shouldn't this at least go in /security/?

fuck off /security/ dsoen't exist

delete it

delete all extra boards

You britons voted for the guy. Now deal with it. But hey, he'll get rid of all those unwanted muslims you hated, was the price of admissal worth it?

>>6
No I didn't! I voted yellow: http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03296/election_simpsons__3296830b.jpg

(first time ever too, I normally vote green)

I have nothing to hide, do you?

>>2
The elite still have plenty of safe spaces afterwards.

>>1
I almost wish this would happen just to see the reaction. I want to see the house of cards fall. I want to see what happens when a country of Internet addicts loses their Internet.

>>10
It's not about taking the internet away, but keeping discussion in places that are monitored, something that the vast majority of facebook machine users are already comfortable with.

When Apple implemented strong encryption by default in late 2014, for example, a senior US police officer warned that the iPhone would become the “phone of choice for the paedophile” as a result.

lol