Everyone knows what happens in the bathroom, but everyone also understands that you have a right to your privacy in there and they don't expect you to leave the door open (unless, of course, that's your thing).
Anyone who says 'I have nothing to hide' really needs to consider things like that, and things like the fact that societal attitudes change. What was perfectly acceptable and normal conversation 25 years ago could absolutely burn you to the ground and ruin your life today if a reliable record of it could be found. When one of Trumps sons somehow gets elected and starts hunting down everyone who spoke ill of his daddy, I don't think "oh but it was accepted at the time" is going to cut it.
torrents - http://nothingtohide.aquilenet.fr
kickstarter - https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1587081065/nothing-to-h...
In reality, we have pretty much the opposite. Because wealth and power protect themselves. So it goes.
Still, the idea that the weak should have more privacy sounds about right.
As an example - it's not clear whether J. Edgar Hoover was gay, but it's quite clear that he threatened and even blackmailed people who raised the question too publicly. Meanwhile, employees lower in the national security apparat were surveilled and dismissed based on even rumors of homosexuality. Privacy remains desirable, but becomes less essential with that sort of rising power.
I believe that the powerful ought to have neither privacy nor immunity. That ought to be the trade-off for having substantive power. There's the old adage about power coming with responsibility. So I'm rather expanding on the basis for responsibility.
In the 1960s if you advocated for racial equality and interracial marriage, you were a social radical, a destabilizer, an insurgent in the popular culture. You were an offensive deviant, actively promoting the destruction of the race, opposed to the church, to the law, to the government, everything. Would social acceptance of racial equality even have been possible to develop without the government and status quo NOT being able to know their undoing was festering right under their noses?
We should never be so sure we're right that we destroy the mere possibility of change.
But as long as we are individuals, we need the space to have a self.
There will always be information we have to safeguard. It's not feasible to switch all authentication from what-you-know (passwords) and what-you-have (certificates) to what-you-are (biometrics), which is the only way I can see us getting rid of SSNs, passwords, and credit card numbers.