That's a pretty fucked up argument. How many other industries would you apply that to? Do banks have no right to keep people from stealing the money they hold? Maybe that's a different situation, because it's not actually their money. But what about brick and mortar stores?
Both of those situations is stealing, not copying. Different things
How I live is none of the government's business, unless they have cause to investigate
The have cause to investigate, you've claimed a certain level of income but publically have assets which would be hard to afford at that stated level of income.
Look for people with a Rolls Royce registered who also claim to earn little money? Then what? Perhaps it was a gift from family, perhaps it was purchased with savings.
The point is, an automated database query is cheap and gives a shorter list of people to investigate compared to everyone in the tax durisdiction.
If you have a car whose purchase price is $40000 and you withdraw $30000-35000 from savings in the months before I think the database query could reasonably file you under the low priority investigation list. If you have a car whose purchase price is $40000 and no transactions which match up with it, then you get filed under the medium priority investigation list.
And if you have multiple houses and no income or savings to account for the purchase costs then you get filed under high priority and a human taxman will start an investigation.
You use the cheapest method available to create ever shorter lists of people with anomalies to pass to the next, slightly more expensive filter.
The larger percentage of the exit nodes a single organisation controls the better chance they have to seeing all the packets from any given user.
Becoming an Internet standard would dramatically increase the number of exit nodes making it harder for a single entity to control a decent proportion of them, although the basic attack would still work with enough resources.
None of this is to suggest that they always wear white hats, or that I'm not deeply concerned with the revelations about their domestic activities
But thats the point isn't? everything they have touched is now suspect.
Everything single thing they have changed has to be viewed as an attempt to insert a trojan. Everything single thing they have recommended has to be viewed as an attempt to limit the effectiveness of security systems to something which the NSA knows they can break one way or another.
but to flip it around and claim that others should suffer if they oppose his views is a bit much.
I read that more as a "it's easy to be opposed to this until you have personally experienced it" comment.
He's not threating people, I don't think he has a dibloical plan to go around giving people Bowel Cancer, something that took 3 years to kill my granddad. He's just saying that people who are opposed to it should perhaps think about what happens when their time comes and maybe a bit of compassion is needed in the process.
How many words per page?
Really? British intelligence went after slashdot?
No, the target were Belgium Telco workers.
GCHQ needed a way to insert malicous scripts on the workers PC in order to gain a foothold on the Belgium Telcoms networks. The way they did that was to run a man-in-the-middle attack on the sites that those workers were going to visit.
Feedly isn't, what's worse is Feedly recently gained large numbers of users from people who were actively dissatisfied with Google so expecting them to just accept G+ authentication being forced on them was never going to end well.
(I doubt any weed could evolve to be immune to getting cut or pulled).
The robot has to recognise the plant as a weed somehow, any weed which doesn't look enough like a weed, or even better looks like the desired crop won't be pulled and that will provide natural selection for the weeds to mimic other plants.