Prism

I'm a fetus, I don't care about privacy. You're making an assumption based off solely the word "age", not the point, the second time you've missed it and the second time I've had to elaborate for you. Now before you try to dig yourself out of your own hole, take from it not from the exaggeration, but the point that, a fetus doesn't really have that much to discuss. You're not even 21 years old I bet, what adventures have you had?

And thus, with age comes a desire from privacy. It's not necessarily age in and of itself, it's with age comes events and happenings that you want to (for whatever reason) keep to yourself. However even still that is incorrect because even today the notion of privacy is completely different. Social media directly contradicts conventional privacy, unless your Facebook friends are only the friends you want seeing things. Time magazine for example talked about how the current generation is more into sharing, citing the number of pictures of oneself they had as an example. A status update or a tweet contradicts privacy because the vast majority of people use it for sharing things that wouldn't be shared otherwise.

(And for the record, I've lived abroad in Bahrain for two years, been to England twice, been to Spain, been to Dubai, been to the Netherlands, been to Australia, been to Canada, and am about to leave for a semester abroad in New Zealand. I've taken numerous road trips with my friends. And I'm in a frat. All under the age of 21. Magical.)

...I hope you aren't as oblivious as to imply you don't realize that's the war cry of jihadists right? Yes it's an exaggeration, but by the Patriot act they could and detain me. Go say "bomb" by itself in an airport, I guarantee you'll be detained. In fact they have for pretty sh`itty reasons;

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/5049867/
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/03...ied-to-co/

I mean really how oblivious are you to not realize this has been going on since the early 2000's.

Saying bomb to a TSA agent or just loudly in an airport is akin to yelling fire in a crowded movie theater; the clear and present danger standard for limiting freedom of speech in America. And again by itself, the Jihadist war cry is nothing because people make it all the time. Not to mention you can find it all over YouTube anyways.

...Godddamit, is this you playing stupid? I can't tell anymore. Your argument holds no merit in that regard because it's already been established that you have a right to privacy, irrelevant if it's explicitly stated or not. It says so in the first two goddamn sentences. It's not even a questionable thing.

Let me help you then: the internet was not around in the 60s. Give me language that says you have the right to privacy on the internet. I'll concede that email should be private and probably Skype/IMs. Can you find anything that says anything else should be private? Now, if the Supreme Court had made a ruling on whether or not there is privacy on the internet (regrettably they declined one that could have *tear*) then this would be different.

This type of data collection isn't solely for "protection", its as much for marketing and it isn't solely internet related. You're fixated on social media when we're talking about the most personal conversations. By your logic it'll be okay to see how many abortions a girl has had because she shouldn't be ashamed of her mistakes. With the whole health epidemic right now, you think that isn't far down the line?

If she is discriminated upon the basis of having many abortions, then it is unacceptable. If the number of abortions is made completely public, say in a newspaper or any other readily and easily accessible medium, then it is unacceptable. If there is public ridicule or shaming, to contrast from a few workers at a company laughing at her in private, then it is unacceptable. Otherwise I don't care, even if it's me.