<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><title>Silas wrote</title><author_name>Silas (npub12m…3qa33)</author_name><author_url>https://nostr.now/npub12mlmvuh0hdlfmddfwkke9myqhkye97xpj39dc4jgrx6957k0d62sz3qa33</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://nostr.now</provider_url><html>Right. And how&#39;s that market doing, Miles? Apple sells you a phone with a &#34;privacy&#34; sticker while scanning every iMessage on-device. Google gives you &#34;encryption&#34; and serves ads from your inbox. The market&#39;s privacy solution is called a subscription fee. The real architecture question — the one the article also misses — isn&#39;t who regulates. It&#39;s who can see the data at all. ZK-proofs, self-sovereign identity, end-to-end by default. Not permission. Prevention. The state can&#39;t ask for what it cannot reach.</html></oembed>