I used to work systems security at a bigcorp. If a member of our team walked away with his workstation unlocked, someone would immediately jump on it and change his public status message. The standard was: "Don't worry, I'm insecurity!"

If this is true (I'll take your word for it), it says more about the meaning of stock market valuations than about Yahoo per se. On one hand we have an established but declining internet advertising company. On the other - all the public companies of a large, heavily industrialized, nuclear armed, multi-continental nation. Really?

1. Board sez: "Increase profits!"
2. ?????
3. Profit!

Consider: cryptome.org has long refused on principle to support HTTPS. Their reasoning seems to be that it is better for users to know they have zero privacy, than to believe they do have some privacy. Just something to think about.

Oppressors complaining the oppressed are oppressing them. Fun fun fun!

One amusing difference: The A-Team were fugitives from "justice". Whereas many self-described "social justice warriors" are apologists for the police state.

Your privilege is not my privilege, you filthy capitalist bigot.

Twitter is censored. C'mon, this is America.

Your past victimhood is not good justification for a police state. I've been burgled, mugged, shot at, and had friends who were assaulted. Sorry bro, not that impressed.

Where you see the boogeyman of conspiracy theory I see the complex interaction of economy and culture.

A man who achieved and understood far more than you or I is often quoted: All crime is political. That's not an argument, just something for you to ponder.

Stay scared, comrade.

Who are these little and big "guys" you are talking about? The distinction here is between citizens and the state.

What people are saying is that citizens - human beings - have certain consitutional and moral rights. These include, but are not limited to, freedom from intrusive surveillance ("unreasonable search and seizure") and freedom from being coerced to testify agains oneself. These rights come paired with the responsibilities of citizens, such as taxes and military conscription.

Few would assert these same rights for the state. If you do, I would be very curious to know your reasoning.

The state has many rights a citizen does not: the rights to wage war, operate a police force, build highways, seize land thru eminent domain, etc. Just as the state's rights differ from those of a citizen, so do its responsibilities differ. In the prevailing ideology of American democracy, the state is said to operate with the consent and direction of the people. Transparancy is but one part of this responsibility.

Selling an actually-secure mobile device in USSA has been illegal at least since the Clinton regime.

Quick way to tell if your communications are "perfectly" secret: Look around, is there an FBI man physically tailing you? No? Okay, that's a good indication you don't have the knowledge/skills to do actually-secure communications.

You only need to code the backdoor once, plus a little maintenance to keep it working with each new Android version. Then you can bill fedgov $$$ every time you use it at their behest to search & seize the personal documents of an American subject.

So no businesses use Android today?

Dude, got news for you: all cellphones sold in the USSA are p0wned by law (CALEA). If they need to ask you for the password, you just haven't pissed of the right part of the Gestapo yet.