Being french, I am quite certain that this is a lesser news to french people than PRISM was to americans.

Read the comments (if you can read french), and you'll notice that the reactions are all a sarcastic combination of "not surprised at all" and "that darn government probably didn't even get this right".

To sum up the differences:

- PRISM was legal. That said, in France, legal coherency is a joke. Laws conflict with each other, and even when voted, they may not be applied.

- There is an implied contract in the US that the government won't spy on citizens. Nobody believes that in France.

- As a result of the above, the people behind this "revelation" won't even be sued.

- French people tend to use services from abroad (mostly american, sweden and german), so the government doesn't have much leverage to get information from companies. I doubt they broke TLS. They do have a huge understanding with ISPs, however. Incidentally, ISPs are severely distrusted by their users.

All in all, our democracy is even worse than yours. Yes, that is possible.

I've actually found the less technically savvy less surprised and less outraged.

Isn't the point that no-one should be surprised any more?

We've recently had revelations suggesting that several intelligence services are essentially grabbing as much communications data as they can. Why would anything think if the US are doing it and the UK are doing it that anyone else with a reasonable budget and level of technical capability isn't?

Moving forward (even prior to this but certainly now) the assumption should be that if a country has the resources to have an intelligence service which can do this, they're doing it.

With regards to this the most likely constraining factor for any intelligence service is money and resources rather than morality, legality or anything else.

Why would it surprise anyone (HN or otherwise) that the NSA is trying to do what is available COTS for enterprise, for auditing and law enforcement (CALEA), on a massive scale? Especially in the current environment of civil liberty erosion? Because its outside their domain and expertise and/or they really haven't been paying attention.

EDIT: the point is that I don't believe that HN should be anymore knowledgeable about this than the General Public because it is a specialized domain. It's not 'the Internet'.