That's quite a strong and completely unfounded accusation.

>First of all, to give words to the obvious question here: what leads a group of people to flaunt their insanely unethical desire to profit from <insert antonym of freedom>? They are literally trumpeting the ability for their clients to forcibly copy data without the permission of the owner of the device in question. Is it just money? Is it that simple?

If you ask around I'm sure most people think LE should be able to do this for security reasons. Not saying I agree or disagree but that's the way it is.

You are only forced to enter your passphrase when you turn on the mobile and once every X days. The rest of the time you can use your fingerprint to unlock the mobile. Seems like a good compromise.

True, except that fingerprint sensors can often be fooled and you cannot change your fingerprint once it becomes "compromised". For instance, anyone who ever visited the US, at least as a non-citizen, will have given their fingerprints to CBP.

I think this only works for an attacker model that excludes reasonably sophisticated attackers. I expect this to thwart pickpockets or muggers, but not the police or anyone more sophisticated than that.

"the future is more complexity" is how we arrived to the modern web.

Could you explain that a bit?

For example, are you implying that the modern web is somehow too complex? Or/and are you implying that we should've stuck to some simpler alternative than the modern web? And if so, what might that alternative have been?

I don't mean to put words in your mouth, just trying to figure out what you meant.

The usual argument in the anti-Chrome threads, which I agree with, is that it's very hard or even impossible to create a new browser and maintain it because of how many features exist and must be supported. Even Microsoft failed.

But, I'm sorry, I have nothing to propose on how to simplify the web. And it would also be offtopic here in this thread... :-) I just believe that adding complexity is most of the time a bad idea.

Ohh that's actually a good point! And I'd liken LaTeX to Chrome in that regard. This is, like Microsoft Internet Explorer before it, people have to use it and work with it because it's the standard that everyone has -- not because it's necessarily the best.

You're right, the broader issue of ingrained standards creating cultural inertia is a big topic that's probably too much to address here.

That's like textboot journalism: say something that is true but at the same time omit an important part to create a negative reaction.