Because there is no single piece of evidence that those performing
the surveillance ever paid any attention to such contesting/begging,
or resulting laws and regulations. There is also no any credible
indication that this modus operandi will change in the future.
Perhaps contest harder? Miracles happen.
Why does the ease with which a given service can be 'snooped or
blocked' impact the legitimacy of contesting surveillance? The
implication you seem to be making is 'surveillance is OK as long as
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: