> you need to convince them that it's bad in a liberal democracy with independent press and functioning courts Do you not follow the Snowden case? You honestl

> you need to convince them that it's bad in a liberal democracy with independent press and functioning courts Do you not follow the Snowden case? You honestly think big media conglomerates constitute a perfectly independent press? . I've heard, in a big USA city, radio ads calling for locals to report people torrenting files out of coffee houses. That for ratting out your fellow citizens, for what amounts to nothing more than distributing shared culture, you will receive money in return. So what if the press is "independent"? What if I just completely disagree with talking points fed to the "independent" press by rich and powerful companies who stand to gain from human suffering. In addition, can you please explain how courts in western countries are "functioning" properly now that NSA-based parallel construction methods are becoming prevalent? How is that fair? How is the surveillance even legal? Finally, in the real world, if you had the ability to pick between a speedy, censorship-free GuiFi CJDNS mesh network running anonymously over I2P, and the government sponsored spy-filled funfest alternative, would you say that all GuiFi users must have "something to hide"? Is there NO reason to have anonymity? Anonymity is unquestionably a benefit for consumers. It is a benefit to protect one's identity. There is _zero_ upside to having all of your data recorded 24/7, indefinitely, by agencies with the power to kill you and to ruin your life. Worse, they can do so for purely political reasons: see Aaron Swartz.