It's entirely okay to bully people who've made billions atop open and open source software into contributing back to the community.

Especially when you can make the case that doing so will help their bottom line and legal footing.

I think OP’s point was that nobody would want to help a cesspool of racists and pedophiles operate more effectively.

Claiming that pedophiles also wish to communicate privately as an argument against private communication is beneath my comprehension. To even think that way gives me a sort of ice cream headache of the soul. Knowing that a large and growing share of people actually think that ways triggers and harms me.

The government should have the ability to violate privacy subject to judicial review. Otherwise, no law could be reasonably enforced.

Successive governments have undermined the authority of judicial review and I'd support anyone campaigning to change that. But, the solution isn't to try and build a system that prevents the government from ever piercing the privacy of citizens. That's just a recipe for anarchy.

Honestly, maybe a few years ago I might have been on your side. But, this whole cryptocurrency saga has just soured me on techno-libertarianism. A society needs an effective government (accountable to the people) that can enforce the law.

The public key cryptographic algorithm is in the public domain so the question is really just how humanity will grapple with the fact that humans can communicate privately.

I agree it presents a lot of problems, crypto has harmed millions of people, and the people who presented crypto as investments should be held accountable by standard government rules.

Yet, people freak out when things like Tornado Cash get sanctioned. If there is total inviolable privacy, then criminals will act with impunity.

But yes, these are indeed complicated problems. All I really know is that I sleep much better at night knowing I've never aided this movement in any way.