If you're watching carefully this shouldn't be exactly surprising. When the Snowden revelations came out Andreessen said that Snowden was a traitor because the

If you're watching carefully this shouldn't be exactly surprising. When the Snowden revelations came out Andreessen said that Snowden was a traitor because the revelations didn't reveal anything that anyone in the know didn't already know: that there was a massive dragnet surveillance program by FVEY. Now, I know I'm a distant minority here when I say that I think that dragnet surveillance is a good thing (I think our opponents are going to do it anyway and we should know what they get, though I'm mostly against secret courts / laws / etc), but what I don't like is hiding information of critical importance from the democracy. Should we have dragnet surveillance, I say Yes, and I'd like to convince you all of my view; but the critical part is that I don't presuppose myself so important as to label someone like Snowden a traitor just because he's brought to light something that a few of us have known for a while. Andreessen not only argues for dragnet surveillance, he argues that Snowden is a traitor. It's in the same elitist vein as the conflict of interest issue with Facebook. He views himself as above us all. This isn't unique amongst the SV elite, but it usually isn't so hopelessly beyond the pale that it so obviously spills over into becoming obvious.