[jupp0r]

> Users should take steps to protect their own privacy on a case-by-case basis, in the same way they look after their own home security or personal safety.

While I agree with your point, home and personal safety are completely broken analogies for this problem. They are regulated heavily by policy (criminal law) and violations enforced by the government (law enforcement).

[infogulch]

This is an important difference. Home locks are trivial to pick for even novices, yet we continue using the same locks. Why? Why isn't there an arms race between lock manufacturers/homeowners and burglars? Because there is external enforcement: if your house is locked, even weakly, that is signaling your intent to prevent access and opens a burglar to legal ramifications if they pick it and enter, regardless of how easy it is.

"Everyone is responsible for their own security" is a wild-west fantasy land that we don't live in. And just because you take actions to increase your personal security farther than normal (e.g. guns, dogs, better locks, etc) doesn't mean you get to put fingers in your ears yelling "lalalala" and pretend externally provided security doesn't exist.