US citizens: call on the Senate to reject the DARK Act.

US citizens: tell the FTC to fight pharma mergers.

Everyone: ask how Gynnya McMillen died in jail.

"Internet assistants" have a secondary danger, beyond just snooping on their users and being SaaSS (Service as a Software Substitute).

It is amusing how someone can be blind to the dangers of these things and worry only about a secondary danger. The secondary danger is real, and the article makes a valid point — but don't forget the primary dangers.

The FBI Says It Can't Disclose Its Records Because Then the Public Would Know How the Bureau Works.

It is spreading further. The former head of the Department of Homeland Security has applied that organization's approach in monitoring faculty and students at the University of California. Professors condemn this snooping.

She refuses even to discuss what kinds of monitoring are being done. Supposedly our own safety forbids giving us any say in how much we are monitored. That's a recipe for tyranny — in DHS or in UC.

Professors should set up their own local networks, and relay data in and out of UC encrypted, to protect themselves and the students.

The article refers to security breakers as "hackers". To avoid giving us hackers a bad name, please use the term "crackers" for that.