Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

>>a constitutional privacy amendment

That would be the 4th Amendment[1].

I really don't think that Americans have never cared about privacy; I think if that were true, we would have a different 4th Amendment. Instead, I think that the various amendments and overall content of the Constitution serve to limit the power of government, and in that regard, it behooves the individuals within the government to disregard as much of the Constitution as they can get away with, thereby acquiring more power for themselves.

That the American people have allowed the individuals within government to disregard the Constitution so flagrantly, to me this indicates a deep gap between the ideals of our predecessors and the ideals of the current generation. So, it's not that Americans have never cared about privacy, it's just that the people of today don't seem to have the political willpower to get it back.

[1] The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.




The 4th has been read to only limit the actions of the government. The courts have ruled that it is OK for the government to pay a company that just happens to have invaded people's privacy in a way that isn't illegal, but that would otherwise violate the 4th.

I'm not sure how the NSA thing is justified, especially given the executive order mentioned in the article.


It's crap and clearly doesn't work very well for the use cases under discussion here. As evidence: the existence of credit scores.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: