The article seems to use the labels 'insider' and 'hacker' to contrast the intent of the two, when the labels should be just used to define their circumstances.

The article seems to use the labels 'insider' and 'hacker' to contrast the intent of the two, when the labels should be just used to define their circumstances. Both Snowden and Ellsberg appear to have done a good job at informing the public given those circumstances, Snowden's being inferior because his circumstances constrained him, not his intentions. Did Snowden steal more data than he needs to because he's a hacker and he can't help himself? Or because he thought its better to take more than less, and then have the journalists figure out what's appropriate?