There is no slope
Yes, I'm well aware of the dangers to freedom, health and happiness we face at the hands of governments (both foreign and domestic), corporations and other powerful organisations and movements.
I don't treat lightly the sacrifices made in war to liberate my forebears from a multitude of tyrannical kings, bishops or dictators. Or the hardships endured to build better lives for later generations via back-breaking labour, overcoming educational disadvantage or fighting injustice and inequality. I understand each freedom I have was hard won at great cost and is precious to me.
It's perfectly possible to accept or reject legal changes that impact on freedom or privacy on a case-by-case basis. ID cards are a good example. People accept passports are necessary here, for travel, but not ID cards for accessing public services. The fact that majority of folks aren't uncomfortable with the proliferation of CCTV in public spaces is just that they understand they may be observed when out in public places and there's no right to privacy there. They still reject emphatically cameras in private spaces such as restrooms, changerooms and airbnbs, for example.
I certainly reject warrantless government surveillance of any kind. That fight is ongoing but there is no slope. Warrantless is warrantless. It was never acceptable. There's a clear line. There needs to be clear, independent and transparent judicial scrutiny of LEA intrusion into the private spaces, thoughts and communications of citizens. Proper warrants should always be based on probable cause and have identified subjects. No fishing.
I don't see how it can be "selfish" to want to protect others from these things
You misread. He asks people to use non-free (his term) resources like javascript enabled Web sites on his behalf so he can avoid the surveillance (but throwing the people he asks to help him under the bus, surveillance wise. Selfish, in my view).
Biting the hand that feeds IT
