Not my problem how you implement it. That's Facebook's problem. My rate is $600 an hour and I'll guarantee I can come up with a GDPR compliant solution within a year or you don't have to pay. That's far less expensive than the fines, isn't it?
Just maybe the EU regulators are technologically illiterate?
And I see that you also punted because you know it’s impossible
Of course they are because
1) all regulators are technologically illiterate, these are not exceptions
2) regulations of this kind are fundamentally about people not microchips. They talk about results to people, not coding constructs or network topologies. If it's technically possible to do it, but not technically possible to do it legally, then maybe it's a bad thing and don't do it at all? If there's a new technology, is it exempt from current standards? Would you say, "hey, new weapon invented, it's legal to murder people with it!" ?
NB: I'm fairly certain that Instant messaging can be done legally; what maybe can't and shouldn't be done legally, is the FB business model of monetising user data over that. IDK why someone would defend it so strongly.
And some US state is banning one app rather than trying to find sensible privacy protection that applies to any app.
I'm not sure of your point, TBH. It doesn't follow at all from the above.
So it follows that you are against W2s encryption because it will be impossible to do securely and allow a backdoor.