Comment: My take on this is:

(See in situ)

My take on this is:

Our rights are inalienable; they're always with us. We have our rights with us whilst walking down the street, for instance. Can we walk down the street naked and demand that everyone close their eyes lest violate our right to privacy? Of course not.

Furthermore, we don't even have a right to privacy within our homes. If, for instance, we leave our curtains open-even just a little bit-people have every right to watch me having sex inside my home as long as they're not on my property while doing so.

We have a right to seek and attain privacy, not a right to privacy in general. I agree with Block here. It is like food. We have a right to seek and attain food for ourselves, not a right to food in general.

In my view privacy, food, health-care and education are covered by the "pursuit of happiness" clause. We don't have a right to happiness, we have a right to pursue it and achieve it. We have a right to secure privacy for ourselves but it's up to us to make sure we don't violate our own privacy by revealing private thoughts over non-secure channels of communication.

The ISPs and telecom companies we use own all the equipment that isn't located on our land. We can't possibly believe that's secure and private. It's up to us to add encryption to internet communications and refrain from revealing private things about ourselves over telephones. As long as the government (or anyone else) doesn't use force; that is, as long as I'm left alone to be as private as I wish, then I'll hold myself responsible for maintaining my privacy.

Work for pay, pay for freedom
Fuck 'em all, we don't need 'em