alt Hacker NewsI skim-watched your link and it doesn’t seem to support your thesis.
First, the secure end-to-end encryption was broken by international police and messages were read without making it illegal.
Second they suggest reading hundreds of thousands of people’s messages to catch a dozen or so gang members - not supporting your claim that only crooks use it.
Third, the video ends by the gang leader saying he was working for the President; not supporting your implication that criticism of government is all baseless conspiracy theories.
I have very serious concerns on the human vs LLM effort that went into this comment, but sure, let's go point by point then.
The first counterpoint I can't even decipher, it makes no grammatical sense. Are you saying that law-enforcement-intercepted encrypted messages are not necessarily illegal? ...why would they be? Sounds like a strawman.
The second is explicitly a strawman. I intentionally left space for legitimate use, because it's a trivial rhetorical target, so I just said that it primarily interests "illegitimate" use for now. While I do not have actually comprehensive data on the Sky userbase, the way these devices were distributed, the volume of criminal-use-connected messages uncovered, and the globally dispersed gang use presented in the video did suggest to me exactly what I said. I'm not sure why you think "just catching a dozen or so gang members" is a reasonable takeaway either, given that the video's focus was exactly just those people.
We can take issue with this, and downgrade this to just being evidence of significant (in the statistical terminology sense of the word) criminal use rather than primary criminal use. I just both fail to find that particularly compelling, and don't really feel like arguing on your behalf.
The third counterpoint I also struggle to decipher. It seems to also build on a strawman like the other two points. You accuse me of implying that "criticism of govt is all baseless conspiracy theories". I don't know how you managed to extract such a thing out of what I wrote, so I'm not sure how to respond. Governments around the world are routinely criticized, have plenty of perfectly valid things going against them, on which both the media and the general public report on plenty. It is - thankfully - only a select few places in the world where such speech is actually restricted. Now that was more a part of my point.