With a good chunk of US developers it wouldn't take more than a few days before employers felt the pain and it had generated plenty of headlines.
Sure, employers would be wrongfully punished, but they'd all spend more money buying political decisions in favor of encryption (and spending money seems to be the only way to influence politicians in the US nowadays).
While I agree with the sentiment, I fear that for many software developers ensuring the continuity of their livelihood is more important — either by necessity or choice — than defending the right to privacy and the freedom to keep private records.
Supporting your children extends beyond giving them a genome and physical sustenance. Genes haven't been the primary avenue of change in our species for at least a hundred thousand years. The significant things we pass on to future generations are our cultures, our languages, our ideas, our ways of life.
Every moment we are building that inheritance.
If we want to give your children and theirs a world where their hearts and minds are nurtured, where they are able to live with integrity and human-heartedness, then we're going to have to make some uncomfortable changes.
I should note that I don't really have a strong opinion on the idea of a boycott. I'm just reacting to the feeling of impossibility that people always express whenever someone proposes a challenging idea. In my experience, that feeling is typically where we hide the simple solution to a problem.
Move to a cheaper house, save up six months expenses. If the issue isn't important enough to sacrifice your comfort for it, it won't go your way. Your children will grow up as subjects, rather than citizens.
Sure, employers would be wrongfully punished, but they'd all spend more money buying political decisions in favor of encryption (and spending money seems to be the only way to influence politicians in the US nowadays).