I love the EFF, but sometimes I don't understand their bifurcated approach to online rights. On one hand, they support and distribute tools like Tor and Privac

I love the EFF, but sometimes I don't understand their bifurcated approach to online rights. On one hand, they support and distribute tools like Tor and Privacy Badger. On the other, they write, in the boldest print of this article: > There is only one way to stop them from winning. > We must speak up and call our elected officials to reject H.J. Res 86 and S.J. Res 34 and preserve our legal rights to consumer online privacy. Well... no. There's more than one way of winning. In fact, it's not at all clear that the state can "eliminate" our online rights. They can infringe upon them sure, and in fact can be counted on to do so. But the internet organism must be made to protect us from the state, and this happens by collaboration of inventors and philosophers and dreamers who create the tooling of the internet, not by a vote in congress. Notice I'm not saying not to call your reps - it can be a very effective tactic. What I'm saying is that "there is only one way" seems to go against the multiple-front strategy that the EFF (awesomely) employs.