Thanks to Toby Stevens for the pointer to this article by Bruce Schneier in Wired. Discussing the US 4th Amendment (which is intended to protect against unreasonable search and seizure), Schneier advances the argument that the “reasonableness” test needs to be revised because it is based on a normative concept of privacy… and society’s concept of ‘reasonable privacy’ has changed to the extent that the reasonableness test is no longer reliable.
It’s a plausible argument, but the article doesn’t address one aspect which is important. It’s this: what one describes as society’s ‘normative concept of privacy’ must surely be tempered by notions not of ‘reasonable expectation’ but ‘informed reasonable expectation’. And arguably, a normative percentage of society is entirely under-informed about the extent of their privacy (or lack of it).