Please post more about Snowden, PRISM, NSA, GCHQ, and all the rest. I will upvote every one of them.

For those who think that "we all know essentially how this will end", think about what the world would look like if every major change had been met with this kind of pitiful attitude. Every revolution, every change for the better, has come out of people rejecting that sentiment.

It's not too late to turn away from the abyss and go back towards sanity and a better future.

I'm not normally in favour of "political" stories on HN but this one is an exception for three reasons.

Firstly, mass surveillance and the end-run around the Constitution is a technological as well as social and political issue that also touches on the hot button issue of privacy and how the legal system is increasingly at odds with the Internet (eg distinguishing between "US persons" and "foreign persons" is increasingly difficult and makes less and less sense in a connected world).

Secondly, most of these stories have been surprisingly informative if you read between the lines.

- Hong Kong (as a plausible deniability front for the PRC basically) stalled on the arrest warrant and essentially ignored the cancelled passport. When prompted by the US AG they further stalled by requesting more information. Basically they took the approach of "who is this Snowden guy?" and threw up their hands saying "we've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas; we're confused!" Make no mistake: this is the PRC making a stand against US policy;

- Russia likewise (it is reported today) claims it has no "legal authority" to detain Snowden and don't know where he is (despite him being contained to the airport as he has no valid Russian visa as far as anyone knows). This, too, is Russia taking a stance against US policy.

- Ecuador too of all countries is taking an anti-US stance. It's a strange country to claim to be supporting human rights (given its record and persecution of journalists who criticize the president). In a news article today it was mentioned that the US refused to extradite bankers to Ecuador. Are we seeing the true tit-for-tat motives here?

- Whether the US will interfere with a Russian commercial airliner that travels in or near US airspace (being the flight from Moscow to Cuba) is an open and noteworthy question. It seems unlikely but the very fact that we even need to ask that question says a lot.

- Obama's war on whistleblowers exceeds that of all presidents that came before him. "Justice" is not the only goal here. Making an example of these "traitors" is. That can be the only explanation for the disgusting behaviour (arguably torture) that applied to, say, the detention and solitary confinement of Bradley Manning (ostensibly under the guise of "suicide watch").

- the administration's adoption of the "Insider Threat Program" basically turns all Federal employees into informants on each other where you can be punished for not informing. This is straight out of the Stasi playbook and happening in the US in 2013. Not only that but different departments and agencies have leeway on defining what "sensitive" information is, which goes beyond "classified".

Third, nothing changes and nothing works... until it does. To take the fatalistic and cynical position that there's no point in trying is just... sad.

This issue matters and it's germane to HN on several fronts. If you don't feel the same, just don't click on the links.

Man I'm sick of hearing this particular complaint.

Let's look at the numbers. 1M plays for ~$42. Sounds like not much right? Wrong.

Yes AM/RM Radio paid ~$1500 but for 20,000 plays. Now ask yourself this question: how many people heard those 20,000 plays? If the rate of pay was the same ($42/1M) it would have to be 35.7M listens. Well, at 20,000 radio plays that averages 1800 people per listen. Is the likely audience higher or lower than this number? It's bound to be higher. So streaming services are in fact paying more (per listen per listener).

See http://davidtouve.com/2011/12/13/uk-radio-versus-spotify-a-c...

"some beaches are private" is actually incorrect - all beaches in California are public from the water to the high tide line.