> In practice, it's not really much more difficult to find a US citizen tech worker who'd be willing to take a few hundred thousand to do the same thing (and it's something that happens routinely)

Where do you get this information?

The difference of course is that when the US intelligence agencies get US workers to spy at US companies they do so for the US government - oh and the countries we see fit to spy on already have fairly severe employment restrictions such that it’s not easy for an American to get a job in one of their companies. There’s an asymmetry that exists here.

> oh and the countries we see fit to spy on already have fairly severe employment restrictions such that it’s not easy for an American to get a job in one of their companies

I'm not sure who you think America spies on, but the real list is much bigger than you probably think, and includes countries considered American allies (for instance, the UK and Germany.)

I guess I’m not sure how that is relative. Israel also spies on the US. My point is the asymmetry here in job opportunities between countries who are our, at least ostensible, geopolitical adversaries.

My point was that the quoted characterization of targets of American intelligence agencies was grossly inaccurate.

> The difference of course is that when the US intelligence agencies get US workers to spy at US companies they do so for the US government

From a security point of view, that's a distinction without a difference.

not from a national security point of view. well, more accurately it kicks the can further down the line to the security of wherever and whoever the government is using for that data.