Which reminds me that CALEA, DMCA and the like was passed in the 1990s, when not as many people was using the Internet as today. SOPA/PIPA was passed in a time when everyone for example is using Google, which is why the protests was so effective. In this case, such a law requiring backdoors would be likely unconstitutional (it was tried in the 1990s too), which is why FBI is resorting to other methods.
I itnerpret the trend the opposite way - lots of people using the Internet, but having no clue how software works and being utterly disempowered with respect to what their devices do. In the 90s, it was the entire Internet community was solidly against surveillance backdoors. Now the majority figures the activities shown on primetime propaganda are what is required to keep them "safe".
> such a law requiring backdoors would be likely unconstitutional
Lol, as if that means anything when all ten test cases from the Bill of Rights are failing! I can see such a law being easily gavel-stamped since it's regulating interstate commercial activity.
But the number of people using the Internet was relatively small, so nothing has changed really. The only difference is that the majority began using the Internet in the first place.
Depends on how one perceives democratic force working.
I don't view the absolute number of calls to congress as important as unstated assumptions about what is "unamerican".
Back in the 90s if you asserted that the government was tapping everything, you were called a conspiracy nut. Because we had a shared societal belief that it was off the table in a free society. This has now been broken.
A politician endorsing a surveillance system that would make East Germany jealous would have been ridiculed by the media. Now they're ridiculed for not supporting such totalitarianism.
Sure, but the cause of it doesn't really matter. The net effect is I feel we're in a worse position for this battle than the 90s. Perhaps the 90s are just safely in the past, but this time I feel this issue will be with us until the tyrants finally get their way, or USG collapses.
And Snowden's disclosures, while great for exposing the conspiracy, serves to normalize the surveillance. Very few people are switching away from butt services as a result, a tacit endorsement of the status quo.
FWIW, if you watch things from before 11sep2001 there's still constant mentions of terrorism. "911" is more of a pretend watershed so we can tell ourselves "everything changed" when in reality the panopticon has been building for far longer.
