We're on an inflection point of history IMO - and privacy is going to be a dead and buried concept, one way or the other. The ability to pervasively snoop another person's history is becoming so easy that it will happen one way or the other. If we pass laws against it, then only criminals and the powerful (often one and the same) will do this snooping.

So we have a choice. We can either give up our privacy, and demand that everybody else give up theirs, or we can pretend that we still have our privacy while the Powerful (government, businesses, the wealthy) use their resources to spy on us, make our decisions for us, manipulate us, etc.

When I decry acts like the Patriot act + sequels, I'm decrying them because they limit the powers contained therin to a single entity, which becomes corruptible.

Hell, I can't explain this without the book in front of me, so get thee to a library, and check out David Brin's "The Transparent Society." I keep coming back to this book, but it's because he made such a powerful argument for the end of privacy in order to preserve our real freedoms (speech, association, property, etc.) that I just can't argue with it.