What is the parent post genuinely concerned about?
For myself, nothing. I have to say I lead a rather mundane life.
My objection is not for myself, it's for others. I don't want reporters tracked. I don't want whistleblowers tracked. I don't want government employees to feel threatened they may lose their jobs because they have a private life. For those people to be safe we all have to be protected from government tracking.
Sorry, accidental downvote. I meant to upvote since you nailed it: I want privacy norms to be respected not because I have anything in particular to hide, but because I want people who can advance my general interests as a citizen to be able to do so safely.
I am acutely aware that doing so demands adversarial relationships with powers that can be concentrated, lawless, and malign. The risks faced by people challenging them are real. They deserve all the protection they can get.
This isn't an argument against privacy, this is an argument against absolute privacy.
You're not private all the time. Stop pretending like you are, it just doesn't mesh with reality. I can fucking see you walk into that night club, you did that in full view of the whole world.
Your argument is similar to the "why are you scared if you've got nothing to hide?" response to the NSA scandal. According to society, we all should be perfect citizens whose outward lives perfectly reflect our inward, private thoughts and actions. But we're not, and evidence to the contrary can be used against us.
But, for the sake of argument, let's say you are perfect. You don't exceed the speed limit, you don't haul drugs. But one of your elected officials really enjoys visiting his secret girlfriend on Sunday evenings. Do you still trust him to vote objectively in every circumstance?
True, I can't see XYZ agency using their records to threaten elected officials, either. But I doubt anyone was worried that promoting an egotistical bureaucrat in the Bureau of Investigation in the early 1900s would ever lead to the reign of J. Edgar Hoover. The whole point is that these things aren't a big deal on their own -- it's the slippery slope concept that should concern you.
This isn't a privacy argument, you already (should) have privacy in the situations where you're not around other people or out in the open.
This is about the times when you're out on the street with everybody else. That's when you can't reasonably expect EVERYONE TO LOOK AWAY when you walk into a store, or buy a coffee or throw your trash on the ground.
It's those times when you're not private. You know, in public.
These things aren't legally protected because our cultural and instinctive expectations forbid them. Try walking down the street and looking every single person you pass directly in the eye for as long as they're visible. See how they react. Follow them around. Write down everything they're doing. Let us all know what happens.
For myself, nothing. I have to say I lead a rather mundane life.
My objection is not for myself, it's for others. I don't want reporters tracked. I don't want whistleblowers tracked. I don't want government employees to feel threatened they may lose their jobs because they have a private life. For those people to be safe we all have to be protected from government tracking.