Yes, ten subscribers left and none not a rat. New York Times today has at least three articles about online spying, two in the back of the business section, one as the principal piece in the Sunday Magazine, unusually long. The magazine piece describes encouragement of people to put everything out there as if a marvelous way to socialize. Some coverage of the delirium of advertisers, such as the Times, at this oil spill of free data. One of the business articles focuses on Twitter giving all its messages to the Library of Congress, and the delirium of scholars at getting this oil spill of data unmediated by authoritatives like the Times and greeders themselves. Twitter claims it strongly emphasizes to its users about the public nature of their data. Says it thinks its privacy policy should be called a public policy, but that California requires a privacy policy so it keeps the deception going to comply with law. All is online spying is lawful, and the data snatchers are delirious with pleasure about it. Marc Rotenberg at EPIC is the sole source quoted as saying US privacy policy is totally fucked up. The article implies the EU approach is better, despite there being no other governments on earth that spy on its people more than the EU, and which blames the US and China and Russia and anybody else handy for being the threat. Finally, a Times editorial today praises Google for its recent disclosure of government requests for data. Says Google intends to turn over the actual requests to an unnamed non-profit for publication. Still no answer to what Google does with the planetary-grade stuff it gathers, that's deeply salt-mined. And nothing about the general online and offline spying practices now endemic under guise of beneficial data gathering and lawful compliance for what else the security of users and nations and economies. On to the hot shit handhelds, climate friendly vehicular black boxes, monitors of kitchen appliances and crib-killer and homicidal students and maturbating parents, and automatic upgrades and renewals sucking your privates. The Times chief editor says also today that the use of anonymous sources is essential to check government abuse, and while there are occasional abuses of the practice that is why ombudspersons are there to keep the Times authoritatively trustworthy. Nothing about Times ads being composed of cancerous waste.