Incidentally, breaking into a physical mailbox is a much bigger deal, which makes zero sense to me.

So far, most people think that physical incursions into a person's private things are more serious than virtual incursions. Perhaps it's the physical safety aspect of it that they think is important.

For what it's worth, I think virtual privacy should be treated exactly the same as physical privacy, and sadly the law hasn't quite figured that out (I think we're in agreement on this)

But I disagree with you that punishment should always be severe. I think data shows that severe punishments do little to prevent crime, and end up just costing everybody lots of tax dollars in incarceration costs.

I do not agree --- in fact, I militantly disagree --- with the notion that physical harm should be more severely punished than virtual harm. Crimes should be punished based on the harm they cause and based on society's interests in deterring crimes. The ease with which a crime is committed should not be a factor in its sentencing.

All crimes are going to get easier to commit this century.