My opinion of this dismissive attitude towards security, were I to express it with sufficient honesty, would probably get me banned from Hacker News. It is the hardware equivalent of “only people with something to hide need encryption”.

It is not.

Encryption issue is about banning it altogether.

This is about user choice in terms of repairability.

This excuse is more to the equivalent of , we are banning all communication in plaintext or any encryption standard, except aes-256.

Everyone has different requirements, choice and deserve the freedom.

Companies dont get to excuse away freedom and choice, in the name of “security”.

> Companies dont get to excuse away freedom and choice

Companies don't owe you freedom and choice. If you don't like their product, if you don't like their concern for your freedom and choice, don't buy it.

Now you’re just being defensive.

We were critiquing a product, now you’re saying, companies dont owe us the right to criticise their product, and that we must move elsewhere instead of complaining.

one second you’re saying “it’s for our benefit”, the next, you want us to stop using the product, because we aren’t “owed anything”.

When did I say that companies don’t owe you “the right to criticise their product”? I didn’t say that.

Arguments with a dishonest interlocutor are frightfully boring. Reply as you see fit, but I’m closing this thread and not looking at it again.

But this doesn't add any real security because it addresses a made up threat scenario.

If people with that kind of resources are out to get you, they can simply lift your fingerprints from elsewhere. A transparent tape on the home button would probably be enough.

It makes my phone much less attractive to thieves would would strip it and resell the parts.

Maybe that isn’t so important to you, but it’s a very practical concern for many people.