Could you try any harder to smash two unrelated stories together?

You do not get it, do you?

A couple of months ago, the default was "I trust this company, unless I have evidence of the contrary". Now the default has radically changed: "I do not trust this company, unless I have very strong evidence of the contrary; and even then, I might not trust them, because they could be forced to lie"

So the internet is now a medium without trust. The less I do there, the better.

> A couple of months ago, the default was "I trust this company, unless I have evidence of the contrary". Now the default has radically changed:

You should probably talk to a professional about this. Distrusting everyone is paranoia and a dangerous attitude.

"It is not paranoia if they really are out to get you"

But I'll take your advice and visit my psychiatrist. In the meantime, no google helpouts for me. I mean, I can probably pass on this one. And on the next one. Why take any risks?

> Why take any risks?

Why leave the house at all? Everything has risks, but it sounded like you were being quite paranoid and I meant what I said with a kind heart.

Well, that is the point. I leave my house every day, even though I know lots of bad things can happen to me, just because I am more or less in control of the risks. If one day I wake up hearing that people are randomly being being stabbed, pots are falling en-masse from balconies for unknown reasons, people are being abducted without leaving trail and so on, at some point I'll start considering staying at home. Not yet the case (at least in my country).

In the internet, I am not in control of the risks anymore. I do not even know who is lying to me. Can I even trust the government? Obviously not! They even have laws forbidding to talk about what they are doing. Is this a democracy? Whatever ...

I'll stay at home for a while, thanks.

Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not after you?