Old solutions to new problems

This post had been sitting in the drafts folder for a good week, and we figured, we will wait until there is an appropriate example in the media. A week was all it took: The Guardian has the perfect example of someone applying the old solutions to a new problem paradigm in the article about Lord Blair's call for new laws to stop leaks.

The one thought that has bugged TheEditor for over two months in the context of the surveillance debate is: the NSA and its brethren in other countries are nothing other than applying old solutions to new problems.

But the NSA is extremely innovative, they are at the cutting edge of the trade.

They are, and that is exactly the point.

For all the glitz and glory, they are using ancient, distressingly inadequate reasoning and tactics with the main stalwarts secrecy and lying.

None of the deep thoughts like "terrorists are living among us" are new.

Where talking to us stupid masses fails, intimidation is used.

The perceived difference on the part of TheEditor is that they have become more brazen and unapologetic about outright lies and intimidation.

After months of reading all manner of articles on surveillance, we can confidently say that the few reasonable voices on the subject include the Comedy Central Colbert Report.

It was on a recent episode of the Colbert Report that a book was presented, detailing how today's world is much safer and more secure than it has been through history.

Or you have to go to Bill Moyers' web site to see Bill talk with author and New York Times journalist Mark Leibovich about his latest book, This Town, in which he writes that money rules D.C., and status is determined by who you know and what they can do for you.

If a little blog like ours can make wild guesses on how Murphy's Law works in the surveillance state and see every single one confirmed (including the #loveint, which we had as class reunion int several weeks ago), what does it say about the subject?

You have realized we do not explain what the new problems are. We trust our readers to fill in the blanks for themselves. That's the big difference between you and the old white males clamoring for more of the same.

Maybe we should go without news for a while.