Replies

"Packets of information passing through computers is fine, that's how the internet works. A person other than the intended receiver reading it, catching it as it passes over his computer or at any other time, is wrong unless there's a warrant."

That's basically a contradiction in terms. Every packet of data on the internet is read by software on multiple machines, none of whom will end up being the intended receiver. A router in particular will examine numerous packets, but only pass a few through it. A cable modem will see every packet sent into its local loop, yet it will only pass those with a certain IP on to its owner. Yet you want to claim that the cable-modem is wrong to read messages that don't belong to its owner. That just isn't how the Internet is designed.

Seeing a difference between humans and computers is a contradiction in terms? LOL

I don't doubt you'll continue to act as if no one had ever thought of such a distinction.

"Seeing a difference between humans and computers is a contradiction in terms?"

Probably, but that wasn't what I was trying to convey. I was trying to show that it is a contradiction in philosophy to be OK with some government machines/software reading your specific internet data traffic (as they must do to determine where to correctly route your data packets or to even diagnose technical problems which are unrelated to you or your data), but not OK with other government software/machines reading your internet data traffic (say, with software like Carnivore).

Having a problem with government software examining open, unencrypted data traffic on the information super-hiway is akin to having a problem with police offices watching your car travel a public interstate hiway. You seem to be OK with one but not the other.