Yes, I'm surprised there is no "right to privacy" spelled out in clear terms. Sounds like that would be a wonderful thing to add directly to the Constitution.
The 4th amendment is supposed to guarantee this right. The Senators are old men who don't understand technology, so they believe that the protections that applied to letters at the time of the constitution don't apply to the medium that has replaced letters, namely email and messaging.
Please... These people know exactly what they are doing. The internet is a lot of things, and one of those things is a tool for mass surveillance. It's always, always been about power and money.
> I'm surprised there is no "right to privacy" spelled out in clear terms.
The problem is, there is no definition of the word “privacy” in the context of “right to privacy” that a majority can agree on. I highly doubt even the niche audience of HN could agree on what they feel is private or not. I think the EU took a decent shortcut around that debate with “right to be forgotten”.
Case in point, there’s a heated debate on HN today in the comments section of the DoJ post on Wikileaks whether Steve Job’s medical history (as shared by Wikileaks) should be private or not.
We need secure software in the hands of everyone making these attempts plainly unenforceable, rather than the current status quo of everyone's software destiny being administered by centralized companies that will comply with totalitarian shit at the drop of a hat.
