I didn't say they were monitoring 300 million people, I said that they could, and so the author's strategy of preventing the FBI from monitoring us by overwhelming them with data is doomed to fail.
If you're going to spread FUD, then you must prove these very strong claims that you are making. Hand-waving dissent away and pretending that you've proven your point is doing no one favors, especially not the people here who may be mislead into believing that you know what you're talking about.
I cannot emphasize this enough: you have the burden of proof, and so far you have completely failed to live up to it.
EDIT: Though, to clarify, I do agree that we don't need 300 million people to monitor 300 million people. That's not the part I'm contesting.
> you must prove these very strong claims that you are making
What very strong claims are you referring to? I have only made two claims:
1) The FBI is easily capable of doing the data processing to monitor 300M people, and so flooding it with data is not an effective defense against being monitored. Facebook monitors 500M+ people. Do you seriously doubt that the FBI couldn't?
2) Data mining the information from 300M people is virtually certain to lead to false positives. Proving this is an elementary exercise in probability theory. The details are left as an exercise.
