[ajross]

Hm. No, I think the practice of using a capability for a bad goal is inherently worse than merely having a capability that can be used for a bad goal. (The whole principle behind the second amendment, after all!)

And we should condemn the overreach on its own terms and by its own moral failings and not just wave it away with a both-sides-ist "They're merely using it how they want".

Bad things are bad and we should say they are bad. Because at the end of the day every government is possessed of terrible power and the only reason any of them don't get worse is that we vote for the people who aren't bad.

[hypeatei]

The point of my comment was to say: you don't choose how the government uses this data against you. Yes, it's bad and should be condemned. But, to completely eliminate this "avenue" of attack then we should've stopped all this data collection in the first place.

[ajross]

And my point was that this is a nitpicky digression relative to the specific crime in progress.

The Godwin equivalent would be discussing the holocaust and replying "Well, if Germany didn't want that they shouldn't have elected the Nazis in 1933." It's true! But unhelpful in context.