cyrnel

I was struggling with that and stopped early. I wasn't implying any solid legal foundation for general privacy. It's a muddy topic. Because capabilities are advancing, and because they can be used for mucho good or ill.

What I was getting at is the historical ability to get lost in a crowd. It's close to gone now unless you're happy living under bridges. That process will continue until our bathroom habits are indicated by the changing color of our front door. Yellow means wait a minute, brown means come back later. There's no end to what can be with long-range RFID and other omniscience technologies as they mature over the next decade or two. What's our limit? Is there one?

I'm not suggesting the general problem lies with this administration, but they're certainly advocating its use. Just as Clinton's administration did with slightly less capable tech a few years ago. It goes back as far as we want to dig. The difference now is one of scale in what can be gathered cheaply, and how quickly it can be mined. As things progress we have to decide where the limits lie or if we want any at all. It seems many people aren't entirely comfortable with letting it all hang out. I'm not, though I lust after some of the technology.

If I sound non-commital, I am. I don't trust our elected finest and I've had enough indigestion this year.

__________________
There are a vast number of people who are uninformed and heavily propagandized, but fundamentally decent. The propaganda that inundates them is effective when unchallenged, but much of it goes only skin deep. If they can be brought to raise questions and apply their decent instincts and basic intelligence, many people quickly escape the confines of the doctrinal system and are willing to do something to help others who are really suffering and oppressed." -Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media, p. 195