Reminds me of the old joke:

Question for great Radio Eriwan: Could the catastrophe of Chernobyl have been averted?
Answer from great Radio Eriwan: Yes, in principle. But the Swedes blabbed.

Well, at least...

It's funny to watch the whole spiel from across the pond. I know, maybe it's the distance and the loss of resolution distance entails, but I can't really see that much of a difference between those two parties that you have. It's pretty much the same party to me, maybe with a strawberry flavor here and a blueberry flavor there, but slushy is slushy. The basic ingredients are the same crap, the rest is flavoring. Artificial flavoring.

But yet you see people bicker with an insane drive to ensure that THEIR side of The Party isn't to blame, it's ALL the other side's fault. I look at the whole mess and can only think that you're sitting in a swimming pool with a line splitting it off in the middle, with either side blaming the other one for pissing in the pool but neither even thinking about getting out and draining the water.

Well, who let them do it?

I guess the pain ain't big enough yet, I don't see many people hitting the streets with a "gimme liberty or death" yell.

Top 10? In units sold maybe. Certainly not in performance. Neither in speed, nor detection, nor ... anything. Unless "turns an i7 into an i386" becomes something we consider important in such a software.

Constiwhatnow? Is that the stuff the health nuts talk about?

Now I can buy an AI so it can play the computer game I bought so I'd have more spare time?

I'll hand it to my cat.

The problem is far easier to analyze. Let's take a look at the premises:

1. The enemy is able and willing to use torture and is able and willing to employ it to reach its goal.
2. You are a human being, able to feel pain, with a finite amount of willpower to resist torture, and unable to escape in a way that is favorable for you.

That's it. And no matter what else happens, it ends in a "don't care" position.

Whether you have that key does not matter. Because handing that key over does not end the torture, because if, in what way and for how long torture is applied is not within your control in any way. Yes, of course your torturer will promise you that it ends if you hand over what he wants, but do I really want to trust the word (because that is ALL I have, it's not like there's an enforceable contract between him and me) of someone willing to inflict pain upon me?

The torture ends only if your tormentor decides he wants to. This has little, if anything, to do with you handing over anything he wants.

I don't. Even if I did, the key would not.

It won't. But how should having the keys keep them from torturing me if they are willing to do so?

I don't win with that strategy. All I can ensure with it is that the enemy doesn't either. But then again, I cannot win with either strategy, so this is the best exit I have. If you can't save your queen, ensure you can take the enemy's one as well.

If I wanted to see that I'd watch C-SPAN.

Now that would be a pain in the ass.

It's a free exchange of opinion. You go in with your opinion and it's exchanged for free for theirs.

If you want access to children, I question your motivation.

In theory you are right. The problem is that laws change and I cannot predict in what fashion.

What you do today and what is perfectly legal may well be illegal tomorrow. Take, say, smoking. Maybe you're smoking. Now let's imagine smoking gets banned. Well, tobacco is addictive. And if you're known to be a smoker, maybe you should be monitored whether you heed that ban or whether you engage in some illegal activity now that your addictive substance is banned.

And should you have dared to criticize the government in a way that has caused enough waves, this just might serve as the excuse needed to make you disappear behind some bars where you cannot reach those that like to listen to you. And hopefully soon you'll be forgotten and life will go on.

There are some countries, and I'm far from talking third world dictatorships, that are on the verge of heavy unrest. I don't want to say civil war, we're far from that, but there's a LOT of very unhappy and very disillusioned people in many countries that we'd consider first world countries.

All it takes is someone to gather behind. And that's to be avoided at all cost if you're a government, interested in preserving the status quo as long as you can.

So anything to get rid of such people is a good excuse. And having access to data is one way to find something. In case you ever wondered what purpose all those unexectuable laws we're seeing popping up could possibly serve, this pretty much is it. But if you need to construct dirt about someone, you need to have access to his documents.

Everyone breaks the law. Daily. Multiple times. All it takes is access to the proof.