If the entirety of human history is any indicator, the governed won't see any changes in a situation like this until they're willing to use lethal force against those who govern them.

When enough of the key positions of political and economic power in a society are filled with sociopaths, the only way you can stop them is to kill them. You can't vote a replacement or try to replace them by running for office yourself because they have the power to corrupt the voting process and to filter out those who attempt to run for office who pose any real challenge to their own power. You can't stop them with protests because they have the force the police to crush any serious protests and they have the force of the media to destroy the message of such protests. The only thing that works when corruption gets really, really bad is lethal force by the governed.

So, unless you're willing to take up arms against your fellow man, you'll just have to bend down and take it. We all know this is true, and we all try to dance around this fact because we like to think we're civilized and above the use of violence, but the fact of the matter is that a small portion of the population is extremely selfish and has no compunction against using violence against you. When enough of these sorts of people get into the place where they have most of the money, power, and weapons, they *will* use those things against everyone else in order to retain their position.

Yes, violence sucks. Yes, it's bad. Yes, we should avoid it if at all possible. But there comes a point when that's all you can do, and that's when the sociopaths hold *all* the cards. How far off do we all think that is? There comes a time when violence is necessary because there are evil, selfish people in the world.

To quote one of The Founding Fathers of the USA, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

So, to answer your question of "What more do you want to see from the people of the United States?", here's an answer that will work: gather together a million like-minded, armed citizens and take the White House and Capitol Hill. Depose all the corrupt leaders by killing or imprisoning them and seizing all their assets. It won't be pretty, and you'll probably end up splitting the US into smaller nation-states, and you'll likely have to do it all again in a few generations, but it's the only way to keep the boot of the government from stepping on the face of humanity forever.

But, good luck with all that, because I hear Miley Cyrus is twerking again or something.

If it is such an altruistic and humanitarian interest that deems we must get involved ...why is it only ever us?

Why is it only ever the US? When has it ever been the US intervening in conflicts in which neither oil nor Israel were involved? When there are only altruistic and humanitarian interests, generally it's the U.N. Peacekeepers who get involved. Even when genocide rears its ugly head, the US can't be bothered to play Team America: World Police.

Why don't we see the UK, Russia, France, Canada, Japan, Australia or any other number of countries pushing for intervention...?

Again, there are a lot of U.N. Peacekeeping forces who would disagree with that statement.

Fifteen years ago I started a Quake gaming site that I stuffed with all kinds of good contents, which included a huge trove of single player cheats, console commands and server commands that I meticulously tested and explained. Those pages may have been the most plagairized works on the internet;

It sounds like you don't understand how the internet works. You can't put something out in public then complain when people share that information. Yeah, it sucks that some people do douchey things like try to take credit for other people's work, but you need to put this sense of entitlement you seem to have in check.

Information is like fire: anyone can just shove a stick in your fire and get their own fire once you've made your fire public, regardless of how hard it may have been to make that fire in the first place. Claiming ownership on fire it just silly.

If the choice was between "flying blind" and "having massive intelligence but sacrificing privacy of X thousand citizens" I think the choice is pretty clear.

We don't live in a world where that false dichotomy exists, so your opinion on which choice, here, is clear is entirely moot.

The Lacks family has never been compensated

I'm pretty sure they were compensated by the fact that a god damn polio vaccine was developed much sooner then it would have been otherwise using those cells.

This crazy monetization of every stupid little thing in our society has to stop. To even think that a person should have been financially compensated -- or to remark that a person wasn't -- for something like this is completely absurd and a damning indictment on our society.

And if compensation was in any way needed, how selfish are we to even consider that bettering all of humanity was not enough?

The Lacks family has never been compensated

I'm pretty sure they were compensated by the fact that a god damn polio vaccine was developed much sooner then it would have been otherwise using those cells.

This crazy monetization of every stupid little thing in our society has to stop. To even think that a person should have been financially compensated -- or to remark that a person wasn't -- for something like this is completely absurd and a damning indictment on our society.

And if compensation was in any way needed, how selfish are we to even consider that bettering all of humanity was not enough?

I'm not certain if you're trolling...

That is a truly frightening testimony against the American employer culture.

(Assuming you are an American, which is probably a safe bet here).

This killed all enthusiasm I had for the game and canceled my subscription same day. Shit that I worked hard for and earned was now just being handed out for free.

I don't understand this point of view. I treasure the time and effort I put into earning my paladin's charger, playing the game with friends. I actually feel sorry for the players who didn't get to experience that.

If you're angry that "kids today have it easier", then you're playing the game for the wrong reasons. This sort of "right-wing" thinking is just going to keep you miserable. If you played it for the adventure and the experience, you won't feel bad if a year down the road someone else gets the same reward for a far lower cost.

For example: Tax the rich 90%. That sounds good to me, it should solve a lot of problems... However... if these people are taxed too much they will move to more tax friendly areas, move jobs out of the area, and in general make things worse in the long run.

Funny...that's exactly what happened after we reduced the tax burden from the rich down from 90%.

I was going to say you sound like you've fallen for some propaganda, but then you said the following and now I don't think you know what you're talking about at all:

Trickle down doesn't work when you give the rich more money. But it does work if you take it away from them.

Trickle-down economic policies don't work, but they do work when you don't implement them???