Good question. Off the bat I am 100% pro-encryption and privacy. This is something that we've been giving a considerable amount of contemplation. It is completely inevitable that governments will use IoT ( which is soon all technology ) to acquire information about the world and its inhabitants, this is a given. It is also uncontroversial at this point ( after leaks and official announcements ) to state that governments do indeed force backdoors into software and hardware. In our company this is not a binary issue ( remember we're all about trinary logic
), there is no simple right or wrong here and it is hard to predict what to do in an instance where governing officials give you the choice of either complying - at least to some extent - to their demands or be out of business, not because of the potential profit loss, but because of the other benefits of what the tech you are creating bring to the world.
So in short: it's a complex issue. We will fight hard to keep all our software and hardware untampered, and just like other technology companies are increasingly calling out for: we will be open and transparent about it all the way.
I do not want a dystopic future where governments got borderline omnipresence and omnipotence due to the ubiquity of technology, but this is no black/white issue, there are a ton of upsides to traffic monitoring sensors in terms of resolving crime, providing immediate help in emergencies etc. Likewise there is an immeasurable benefit from wearables and implantable health technologies that stream their data directly to healthcare professionals etc. to prevent death and disease and so on and on and on.
This is an issue I personally have given a ton of thought, which is why I am on hobby side work on distributed-decentralized identity together with Dominik (
www.composui.com), with the goal of enabling people to keep their data secure and safe, but at the same time useful through something like zero-knowledge-proofs. So you can be sure that this is something I, as the leader of Jinn/IOTA, take very very seriously.
But again I want to stress that this is not a black/white issue with simple answers.
Even a decade ago, it wouldn't be surprising to hear a scientist say that his or her scientific discoveries were morally, socially, politically, and psychologically neutral. Of course we can quite easily see now that no innovation or genuine discovery happens in a vacuum. But not everyone embraces the responsibility and the complexity of their research and creations. Thank you for such a thoughtful response.
My hope is that the knowledge and technology can grow together with the best interests of the community and all who might be affected by it. More than a hope - it is something to which I would like to contribute, though I do not know how at the moment. As you suggest, there are no shortcuts or simple, singular answers when so much is at stake.
