You're pulling that quote out as if the article is asserting the obvious answer to that question is yes, but the article's entire thesis is "the slippery-slope argument is a legitimate concern" (that's in quotes because, well, it's literally a quote). Literally the next sentence after the one you quoted:

> If they don’t, and these features creep into surveillance for things like political dissent, copyright infringement, LGBT imagery, or adult pornography — anything at all beyond irrefutable CSAM — it’ll prove disastrous to Apple’s reputation for privacy protection.

I'm pulling the quote out to highlight that he's willing to believe the answer could be yes, which is absurd.

Because Gruber is such an Apple fanboy, it's near impossible for him to accept that Apple just gave him the finger.

Not to mention even if we could somehow trust them now, there is an infinite variables on the futures for this to change.