Ok, government, you win. You've got our data. Now, what can we do to make sure you use it against Them and not against Us? In fact, can you tell the difference?
If we want our government to back off, the deal has to be that if — when — the next attack comes, we can't complain that they should have surveilled us harder.
A trade isn't fair trade if we don't know what we're giving up. Do you hear that, Security for Privacy trade-off?
1) no, "government" doesn't win. those that have violated the constitution should be tried and punished.
2) there is an extraordinary difference between "we dont want you to do unconstitutional warrantless mass surveillance and universally weaken security" and "we dont want you to do any surveillance". should they do surveillance? yes, off course, that's why government spies exist, to find and stop those who want to harm us. that said, warrantless mass surveillance is not required to achieve that goal and if the people in the government dont understand that then they are clearly in the wrong line of work.
cluetrain, let me show you my cluebat.