&gt; Limiting the government&#x27;s power doesn&#x27;t seem to be so effective, so why not try &quot;both&quot; [0]?<p>Really? It hasn&#x27;t? Has your lord recently claimed his right of Prima Nocte with your new wife? Have you ever been conscripted into his army to fight against another lord? Have you seen many people summarily executed because they displeased a nobleman? I&#x27;d say we&#x27;ve come a fairly long way, historically, in limiting the ability of government to abuse citizens. Obviously, there is still room for improvement.<p>&gt; If 80% of people think some self-contained behavior should be prevented, then lacking privacy the remaining 20% will be abused with no way to change it.<p>We have a way to change it. It&#x27;s called &quot;democracy&quot;. Letting unjust laws stand and trying to hide from the authorities instead of changing the unjust law is cowardly and ultimately ineffective.<p>At one point 80% of people thought such self-contained behavior as being gay or interracial marriage should be illegal. We didn&#x27;t make stronger privacy laws so that you could hide that you&#x27;re gay or married to someone of a different race, we made it so those things aren&#x27;t illegal. That is the right fix. That is the only fix that will ever work.