| > so I guess I'm really the one you're responding to Partially, yup. > facts on the ground Again, I emphasize that I learned most of what I know by following privacy-oriented links on HN, and reading public sources. And I know these things because I, like you, think it's very much worth thinking about. I want to know whether or not Google is evil. > Google is a humongous red target Absolutely. No doubt. > we should all be encrypting everything I think I agree with your reasoning, but I disagree with your conclusion; I think this is simply evidence that I value my privacy much less than you value yours. > trend of slow erosion This one flows back and forth. The battle is not lost, even in the US. See e.g. that last link my my previous post, re Judge Susan Illston possibly already have ways of doing this You know what an NSL is, right? As far as I can tell, the FBI can ask for anything of anyone at any time. If surveillance scares you, get scared. Though, again, c.f. Susan Illston. In any case, I once again think it is important to distinguish between the good points you make in this comment, and the shitty summary you made in the previous comment, which in my opinion is vastly under-supported and also probably wrong. > not sure if they'd still have me, though, since I make the above point not infrequently They hired me. |