Would you personally be (as) worried about mass surveillance if you could somehow guarantee that every use of that power would be reported on to the public; and that any abuses of power would come to light? With the underlying assumption that those abuses of power would also have consequences.
I suppose that if we get very technical you're technically correct. Seems like an odd and very pedantic hill to die on though.
While there probably are thousands of real issues that don't make it onto HN and thus never get resolved, there's probably multiple millions of people just as desparate that are just trying to skirt some rule or are telling half-truths to try to get their way and bypass policies.
I'd call it "profoundly misleading about a serious matter" at best.
Let's say one day you stumble upon some nuclear centrifuge in the middle of a field. Who do you even call and how do you do it in such a way that you don't end up on the no-fly list for the rest of your life?
- Drawings, 3D renderings,
- People you don’t have the ID of. Remember the joke: “Actress ___ turned 18, it is now legal to watch her films.”
While one of the gravest crimes, accusations of CP made by police are wildly different from a human’s definition of it, and it is also at high risk of being used for political reasons, we need to keep that in mind.
The FBI served USA Today with a subpoena. USA Today's lawyers replied to the FBI, stating that the subpoena is "not authorized under federal regulations, and object to its service" [1]
[1] (page 15) https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.231...
It's an inside HN joke, to point out that the less exposed something "bad" is, the more likely it is to continue, and if it becomes widely known (not merely publicly available), then there is often visible backpedaling.