Ordinarily, I wouldn't. I don't think I should have to pass an ideological purity test to put forward a descriptive argument about how FISC works.

But I found this article because Paul Graham twerped (approvingly) about it, and bothered to comment because HN was an easier place to disagree with him about the quality of the article than Twitter.

In doing that, I didn't want the thread to become a gigantic pointless fight about who does or doesn't support the surveillance state. It was a courtesy, is all.