All they can do is stick to the letter of the law.
That's not all that they can do. Google, Apple, Facebook, Microsoft, Amazon, et al. are some of the most powerful entities in the US besides the oil industry. They matter to the US economy, and for that reason they are clearly in a position to influence government decisions.
This has both positive and negative outcomes. Since trust in terms of privacy is important to Google et al., they are (probably) trying to prevent eavesdropping. This can be witnessed in Google's push to push SSL everywhere, their increased transparency with respect to information requests, and Facebook's lashing out at Obama over domestic spying.
On the other hand, some outcomes are detrimental as a result of a fierce battle between the technology companies, resulting e.g. in blocking of patent reform.
Influencing government decisions is typically done by lobbying, handing more power to the state by way of smothering them in funds. Yes you might get your pet project some extra attention, but it's likely that the funds you use to accomplish that objective will be used for heinous ends elsewhere. It's much like negotiating with terrorists from a game theoretic perspective.
Other alternatives are massive public awareness campaigns with regards to any given issue, but these appear to be losing potency as it becomes clear that basically everything the state is doing is broken from the perspective of citizens in some way, and they are not much interested in "fixing it" as it is working perfectly from the perspective of political parasites.
The only unalloyed good that can probably be done is financially contributing to improved security and other technological innovations that directly thwart the interests of the state. Doing so more advances the interests of their potential free market competitors than their own however.
Consider the massive power wielded by SpaceX with respect to the purchase of Russian rocket components. They prevailed by applying the right amount of pressure at the opportune time (viz a viz Ukraine).
In principle, this accomplishment could be replicated.
They're advancing the interests of the state in the all important "great game", effectively increasing their power. All due respect to SpaceX, the state needs to die, not be further empowered. Not a valid strategy.
Also, they engage in good old fashioned direct bribery;
The state must die is not a call to violence, I mean to say the institution of political authority must be annihilated, not the people that currently hold that authority.
I wish all individual humans within those institutions long happy productive lives after they stop threatening everyone outside those institutions with violence.
> That's not all that they can do. Google, Apple, Facebook, Microsoft, Amazon, et al. are some of the most powerful entities in the US besides the oil industry.
Above the oil industry and the US government there's the power driving the world (into oblivion): Wall Street (the financial services industry).
That's not all that they can do. Google, Apple, Facebook, Microsoft, Amazon, et al. are some of the most powerful entities in the US besides the oil industry. They matter to the US economy, and for that reason they are clearly in a position to influence government decisions.
This has both positive and negative outcomes. Since trust in terms of privacy is important to Google et al., they are (probably) trying to prevent eavesdropping. This can be witnessed in Google's push to push SSL everywhere, their increased transparency with respect to information requests, and Facebook's lashing out at Obama over domestic spying.
On the other hand, some outcomes are detrimental as a result of a fierce battle between the technology companies, resulting e.g. in blocking of patent reform.