[Redoubts]

> In short, despite the article's somewhat negative tone overall, I don't think anything described is actually a negative thing

I think the main thing to criticize, is that

1. Banks are deputized as ersatz law enforcement, and will cooperate in ways you would otherwise expect to warrant a warrant, or do damage to people you would otherwise expect a court to gate.

2. Government has set up laws that on their face sound reasonable, but are extremely easy to run afoul of, and extremely easy to prosecute.

3. Banks have delegated decision making to private entities, which confounds oversight and is probably extremely under regulated vs anyone’s expectations

4. A lot of this power is wielded at the discretion of political actors at both ends

5. The main lesson of American politics since Nov 2016 is that we need more guardrails than “discretion”