Actually they are.
>most people assume taht the government already has/had access to what you do on your cellphone/facebook/internet searches
I think that most people assume that email is just like mail: private, and protected by the 4th amendment. I think most people assume that their phone records are similarly protected. And I doubt that most people, possibly including people in Congress, know what is possible to infer from the data they are collecting.
I think that most people assume that email is just like mail: private, and protected by the 4th amendment. I think most people assume that their phone records are similarly protected.
The law has said otherwise for >30 years, and I think most people who think about it are aware that their email and phone records are stored by 3rd parties. Do you have evidence for your view, or are you just projecting what you think should be the case onto everyone else?
Projecting, mainly. Just like you. Pew did a phone survey that shows 56% of people believe it's okay to give up privacy to defeat terrorism. But even that doesn't really go to what people believe about their privacy right now.
No, I think we should have more robust privacy protections and that this would require a constitutional amendment, but I'm also aware that my view has little traction at present. I'm sanguine about monitoring of things like CDRs because it seems an inevitable result of technology, and it's unrealistic to expect the government to put itself at a legal disadvantage compared to individuals and businesses. On the other hand, this fact of modern technological life is why I choose not to put my life on services like Facebook, despite the significant social disadvantages that entails.
> most people assume taht the government already has/had access to what you do on your cellphone/facebook/internet searches so actual evidence of data manaing doesn't seem all that big of a revelation.
No, you're not projecting at all, are you.