a) False, privacy is exactly what we're talking about. b) irrelevant.
When you allow yourself to be vulnerable to others with power over you especially the government, eventually they will take advantage. Whether you or someone unluckier, and we should protect the weak. This has been recognized for centuries, try reading some Locke or Jefferson.
In the general, yes, we're talking about privacy, but specifically, no, it's not what we're talking about -- we're specifically talking about Skype's need to be completely private, and how if it's not, we're somehow losing the battle for privacy everywhere, as if Skype's insecurity will make people unable to use PGP or some other good encryption.
Just because I can post a bulletin on a public poster board, doesn't mean I can't also write a private letter. There are no "weak" people here, and plenty of better battlefronts to wage this war. Every single messaging platform doesn't need to be completely secure, that's absurd.
Just to back up a second, what is it you think I'm advocating here? That we not have privacy??
No, but the freedom to have "no privacy" is not a problem anyone has. There is no privacy online and no alternatives to Skype that we can get anyone to use.
