> “It’s hard for me to imagine that there are a lot of technology executives that are out there that are in a position of saying that they hope that people who wish harm to this country will be able to use their technology to do so,”<p>What horseshit!<p>Calling out the government for blatantly overreaching the constitutional authority it claims grants its power isn't even a little bit the same as hoping terrorists choose _your_ technology to harm people. That claim is not only intellectually dishonest, but it distorts the discourse to utter nonsense (which is precisely why they frame it like they do).
We begin therefore where they are determined not to end, with the question whether any form of democratic self-government, anywhere, is consistent with the kind of massive, pervasive, surveillance into which the Unites States government has led not only us but the world.<p>This should not actually be a complicated inquiry.<p><a href="http://snowdenandthefuture.info/events.html" rel="nofollow">http://snowdenandthefuture.info/events.html</a><p>Surveillance is not an end toward totalitarianism, it is totalitarianism itself.<p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/europe-24385999" rel="nofollow">http://www.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/europe-24385999</a>
I use Gemalto, and not just in my cell phone. The cyber-war the While House is waging on the tech community is ill advised. If anyone at in the federal government is smart enough to read hacker-news I hope they see that they're attacking the wrong people.
> "...there are opportunities for the private sector and the federal government to coordinate and to cooperate on these efforts, both to keep the country safe, but also to protect our civil liberties."<p>Sure. Corporations often cooperate with the hackers caught climbing around their systems. "I see you've already taken my keys. Perhaps we can come to some sort of key-sharing arrangement?"