What are the use-cases, and when would such a policy have led to a drastically different outcome (in the case of a crime being committed, industrial espionage, or what-have-you)?
If I have a laptop encrypted with luks or whatever, then what? What are the consequences of non-compliance?
Anecdotally, my Aunt had banned all guns and violent toys from her house. One morning, after serving breakfast, she noticed that my cousin had bitten his toast into the shape of a gun and was making "pew-pew" motions. They laugh and laugh about that. It is what it is.
Of course every commenter wanted to bikeshed the SSL/crypto sentence. I forgot where I was commenting. I accidentally set the stage for a mountain of security circlejerking.
No nibbles on the protocol point, which in fact was the main thing.
Virus going to do what it's going to do. People can choose to stay home but this shelter in place stuff is wrecking the lives of the poor and the people who are most vulnerable.
Canonical always has tried to differentiate themselves, and they just can't execute. Remember Unity, Mir, Juju, upstart and all the other failed shit they've come out with? Snap is just more of the same. I don't want to run that garbage on my desktop. I don't need more daemons and forced auto-updates and all the baggage.
I strongly recommend anyone similarly frustrated to check out debian, which is a fantastic distro. Thanks to Kevin for posting this, but if you're using Ubuntu and disabling snap, you're fighting against the current and I have to imagine it's going to be increasingly difficult with subsequent releases.
If I have a laptop encrypted with luks or whatever, then what? What are the consequences of non-compliance?