I think we're both resisting just in different ways.

I take the typical cypherpunk approach: adopt decentralised tech the government can't actually control in any meaningful way, run infrastructure for it to help it grow, do so anonymously if need be, but no law will stop me from doing it. The government will quickly realise the futility of their laws as technology continues to rapidly outpace them.

You wanna take the fight to Apple and Google and show them *their* rules can also be easily bypassed.

Both are worthy battles. It's just I view the state as a far greater enemy. Apple and Google only have the strict rules they do because of laws like this to begin with. Best believe they got armies of lawyers just to carry out risk assessments.

So I feel like aiming directly at the enemy at the top and laughing as they're foiled by nerds on the internet is the most direct action and makes them look like the fools they are.

Given the legal landscape, I don't think the tech giants will change their rules because quite frankly they don't really care if they work. They just need to be able to tell the government they did their best.

Much more delight in showing up the politicians responsible for all this bullshit as the halfwits they are.