Bruce Schneier offers a recap of earlier MemeStreams privacy threads:

The problem is, in today's information society, the "expectation of privacy" definition test will rapidly leave us with no privacy at all.

Even if society still has some small expectation of digital privacy, that will change as these and other technologies become ubiquitous. In short, the problem with a normative expectation of privacy is that it changes with perceived threats, technology and large-scale abuses.

The trick here is to realize that a normative definition of the expectation of privacy doesn't need to depend on threats or technology, but rather on what we -- as society -- decide it should be. Sure, today's technology make it easier than ever to violate privacy. But it doesn't necessarily follow that we have to violate privacy.

Adam Shostack on Daniel Solove's book:

If you work in privacy or data protection either from a technology or policy perspective, you need to read this book and understand Solove's approach.

Decius on Jed Rubenfeld's essay:

We are very close to the point where the 4th amendment will be an anachronism - a technicality that has very little impact on everyday life - and a radical reconsideration will be necessary in order to re-establish it.

Orin Kerr:

The government could go to your Internet service provider and say, 'Copy all of your e-mail, but make the copy a millisecond after the email arrives,' and it would not be a wiretap.

Thomas Powers:

Is more what we really need?