I think the point that they're making is that one communicates
   differently when one knows the line is tapped. Better self censorship
   than blabbering with delusions of security. This isn't a philosophy
   which I personally agree with, but I believe this was their intention.

   On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 5:51 PM, Adam Back <[1]adam@cypherspace.org>
   wrote:

     On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:32:00PM -0400, John Young wrote:

     Bluntly, anybody who peddles security is a cheat.
     Those withdraw it are worse.

     I was thinking something like that about the silent circle shutdown.
     It
     seems to me their problem case was the mail in (they would be
     encrypting
     that to the user PGP key or equivalent, after sender optional use of
     SSL to
     deliver it to them). So would not a more sensible change be to
     disable
     mail in? So then only silent circle users could encrypt messages to
     each
     other. Even that would add pressure to other users to also get a
     silent
     circle account and so be a business advantage.
     Puzzlingly spun "to protect our users privacy we removed their
     encryption
     feature" - so they'll probably send it plaintext instead, great.
     Adam

   --
   Rich Jones
   OpenWatch is a global investigative network using mobile technology to
   build a more transparent world. Download OpenWatch [2]for iOS and
   [3]for Android!

References

   1. mailto:adam@cypherspace.org
   2. https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/openwatch-social-muckraking/id642680756?ls=1&mt=8
   3. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.ale.openwatch&hl=en