[enko]

> Maybe you view the scanning of the outside of people's letters differently now... but it's not a new story and the article says as much.

I guess it's the context of an all-pervasive spying culture that lends it a new relevance.

And who cares if it's "new". We might only realise the relevance of an old story years later. We might only realise a whistleblower was telling the truth after years of dismissing their tall tales.

edit: eli deleted the post I quote. Oh, don't like things you say online being used against you later? That's not new either.

[eli]

No need to attack my character. I deleted the comment immediately after writing it because I decided it contributes to the thing I'm complaining about, which is many front page stories full of repetitive comment threads that are only tangentially related to the linked story and contain little new information or insight.

[enko]

Fair enough. Usually I would probably agree with you. But in this case, I feel the "reaction comments" are important. The reaction is going to be the main story, after all.