&gt; <i>And if you ask normal people whether they think government employees should be able to read steamy messages between husband and wife, the answer is going to be no.</i><p>Disagree. The person imagines a <i>constrained</i> government, which would only be reading private messages when there is reason for suspicion. The only time another <i>human</i> would be invading their privacy is in an exceptional situation that happens to <i>others</i> (since they themselves are good), which can be just-worlded to the required degree. And of course mass media distorts their priors to think that suspicion strongly implies guilt - a TV show would be quite boring if there were no wrongdoing.<p>I suspect tech is so (relatively) resistant to mass surveillance because we&#x27;ve perceived how horribly wrong group dynamics go and, rather than accepting being compliant herd followers, found our own outlets and created our own kingdoms. <i>We</i> are the outliers - we will never have the majority on our side.