> And you think that's what it would take to be "remotely close"? Basically any AFK stuff is pushing it, and apt to be very invasive of privacy and truly Orwel

> And you think that's what it would take to be "remotely close"? Basically any AFK stuff is pushing it, and apt to be very invasive of privacy and truly Orwellian. The distinction I make is the NSA resides on the network and doesn't go much further than that. Is what they're doing Orwellian on the network? Possibly, but only insofar as I let them on my network. Who is to say I don't use secure meshnets? Who is to say I don't watch the watchmen? I respect your thoughts on the matter, and the current narrative does suggest we are tending towards a 1984 panopticon, but this is also framed in the context of pervasive CCTV, and presumes that every citizen is glued to their smartphone. Measures like CCTV and smartphone tracking observe the citizenry and this means everyone is kept in line and the system works, so fair dues, this could be seen as 1984'ish. But again, only insofar as the citizen opts in. It is said we would prefer to be watched than go about our private business alone. (And yes CCTV can be opt in, but that is a lot harder to achieve and ironically requires Google Maps hacking to pinpoint where key CCTV hotspots are) TL;DR: I don't negate 1984'ish elements, I'm simply saying they are opt-in only, and not as bad as the current narrative suggests.