There's currently a Supreme Court case (King v. Burwell) that hinges on precisely the issue of whether a technical flaw in the legal language invalidates what the legislature clearly intended to pass. It's a lose-lose for the right wing (either their last-ditch Hail Mary to get rid of Obamacare fails, or the Patriot Act sunset provisions really did expire without being replaced with the "USA Freedom" versions).
If you mean "actually stopping terrorists", then sweeping up everything makes their job harder (e.g. the clear red flags about the Fort Hood shooter, the Boston Marathon bombers, the Garland shooters, etc got lost in the information overload).
If you mean "collecting a paycheck until you can collect a pension", well, then, yeah, being able to sit at a computer instead of wearing out shoe leather makes their job easier.
All the warrants in the world can't get them past encryption.
Nonsense. Keyloggers and other bypass methods are well-known technologies. Of course, they need to be installed one device at a time, which is a bug for the Feds (who want to spy on everybody) but a feature for us (who want the Feds to obey the law).
This isn't about banning any sort of genuine scientific "research". It's about banning use of government resources to commit fraud. It's like (for example) banning government chemistry labs from trying to develop a chemical to mask melamine detection so that crooked businesses can sell poison pet food.
I would have loved to be a fly on the wall when the **AA apparatchiks who made noises about not giving Obama any more money heard the GOP candidates fall all over each other to be more anti-SOPA than the rest. (Exception: Santorum was squishy on it, and a brief perusal of right-wing commentary boards shows that he's catching flak for that.)
Yeah, these guys are going to sit back and let the Republicans win, you betcha!
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by SteveMB.