So, the many downsides of implanting backdoors into cryptography are most of why I oppose them, and support the global deployment of default-unbreakable communications, so that people don&#x27;t even have to think about whether their communications are electronically protected but simply always are.<p>But that&#x27;s not what I&#x27;m taking issue with. What I don&#x27;t get is the repulsion people here seem to have with the simple idea that the state <i>is entitled to evidence</i>, as part of the social contract that animates the country, and that technology is in fact poised to overrule that entitlement without due process of law or politics.<p>It&#x27;s a simple and sensible issue to have with crypto. Crypto is important and valuable technology, but that doesn&#x27;t mean everything about it is <i>good</i>. It has downsides, too. We should be honest about them, and less shocked when people weigh the downsides differently than we do.