How can you maintain privacy in an age where technology can reveal so much?

I don't know why the hell they'd be worried about so many people. As a society, we tend to exaggerate how good/bad things are, but in the rank and file on Main Street, we're pretty boring, harmless and a waste of time to invade and divulge most of our personal lives.
I say...make EVERY life open to the public! From Michael Moore to Andrew Breitbart, from Chris Christie to Jerry Brown, from LeBron James to Kobe Bryant; from sea to boring ass sea, so when you scrutinize one life, you can actually compare how human and ridiculous we ALL really are.

Yes, and I think that's OK.

The problem could be employers not liking your stance on issues and you could loose your job.

Outside of that.

You should conduct yourself online as if you were talking to someone face to face.

When we are online or in our cars, we can behave in a disrespecting manner. You might throw a bird at someone in your car, but not face to face with them.

depends upon the defifition of "privacy"

In June, 2008 Albert Gore delivered a speech in Washington, D.C.
explaining the confluence between 1. Global warming and it's clearly
disastrous effects on world hunger through desertification & drought..
As well as the impending disaster in world fresh water resources...
2. The insane dependence on fossil fuels which makes for military
deployment in Iraq, Afghanistan (and since Libya and Yemen ). And
3. The economic depression here in the USA domesticly because of
the impact of more money leaving the country than coming into it,
which shorts the money supply normaly used to fund & payroll jobs.
We must know there's a massive need for the kind of green jobs
that they employed in Germany to make it energy independent and
to rebuild 100% of the infrastructure of the USA that's been crumbling
since the advent of the irresponsible Reagan/Bush era of the 1980s.

Question: Does anyone get the connection between the invasion of
the masses' privacy for further control of the population to weed out
dissenters who oppose the current predatory foreign/domestic policy ?
In the 1980s they used to call people like Alexander Solzenichen
" political dissidents " mostly because they were Russians which to
gasbags like Reagan was an " evil empire ". Now those same people
inside the USA call fellow conscientiously objecting citizens " terrorist
sympathizers " because they dare to freely exercise their 1st Amend
ment right to speak out as political activists to object to illegal foreign
wars of Fascism and Corporate Piracy, Prohibition and the $2.3 Trillion
annual Prison Industrial complex bleeding us, and the foreign owned
Federal Reserve which functions like quacks applying leeches to cure
a sick patient. ( Senator Sander's Fed audit exposed the alleged $.75
Trillion Bank Bailout/financial meltdown of 2008 which Goldman Sachs'
Treasury infiltrator/traitor Paulson engineered proved to be a $16
Trillion printing of currency then loaned to foreign banks & who else
but Goldman Sachs et al Corporations-all without authorization--while
people endured hardships comparable to the 1st Great Depression.
Obviously the puppet masters have an obsessive compulsion to have
totalitarian control over the masses to make them all followers. They
don't like intellectuals wise to their embezzelment of our cash or Liberty.
Back in the U.S., back in the U.S, back in the U.S.S.R.

I don't know who OBL is, but privacy intrusions are not intrusions when given. Those who commit fraud to bring someone into a zone where their safety, health and well being are under attack. Woman have to worry about these things. Many were not conditioned to deal with loss of these basic necessities, and yet I feel it is an important piece of the journey of purpose. But is it ok to attack and deprive victims? Why are you questioning a persons right to stand by their rights? Oh yeah, that's also harrassment if you play into the factor of trying to control the circumstances. This is a very defensive statement on your part and you do not have my consent to apply your logic to justify any such acts as being unaware of the rules. Poorly played.

I would greatly prefer that privacy be the default on the internet and then one could trade off information as it is required to provide services. That said, it is not feasible that one join social sites and then get irate over the privacy intrusions. I do worry about how connected those sites are to others. Giving limited permission to Facebook should not mean joining the international database completely.

The most disturbing thing I saw on the Today Show this A.M. was a staffer? violently tearing a protest sign re: Dick C., out of the hands of a spectator. I said to myself, "oh-h-h-h, I can't wait to see what Keith says about that",..... and nuthin'.... so far... Whassup?

I think a "OPT out" selection should be allowed and enforced so people can not search you, sites etc... Put privacy back in the hands of the people instead of the government or some corporation!!!

Become Brainiac 3.0.? Kidding. The human brain is said to contain
more firing power than 12 mainframe computers. Yet we only use 1-3%
of our thought potential. As one of thousands whom the C.I.A.distributed
( 20) Lysergic Acid Diethylmide #25 doses to from 1968-1972...Someone
born with psyionic traits in their genes and bright normal in Psychological
testing, I know there's always a way to show a narrower profile to those
so hyperagressive they'll have designs on using you surreptitiously w/o
your informed advanced knowledge & consent- if you let them. But the
point is, so what if they can profile you ? If your mind is well exercised,
and so expansive that you have many interests in life to absorb you,
then you can withstand anything they cook up anyway. Simply because
you're stronger than they are.

.
privacy:

get someone to bring food in a cash paid taxi and leave it at the back of an abandoned building you found to live in...

It is just something you have to live with to protect you from the dangers of terrorism.

Develop anti- surveillance technology.

Trying to maintain privacy defeats the purpose of the internet. Now, I'm all for freedom, but the internet was created to connect people and facilitate the spread of information. Now we're all caught with our pants down because it works TOO well. If you are "you" on the internet at any time, kiss that privacy good bye... It was gone the second you signed up. Now... If you're smart enough to not be "you"... well that's a different story all together. It would be nice to not need anonymity, but with the current laws in place, it is necessary for true freedom and the free flow of information. There always ways in, out, and around a system...

You just need to really understand how it works... Deus Ex Machina in a way, but it's no longer a literary tool, it's a tool for survival.

You probably just have to live with it, [ lack of "privacy" ] because there really isn't a good "defense" that can "bring back the good ol days".

In theory,.....you COULD go on the offensive ( personally, or with help );
plant lots and lots and lots of false information, all over,...all the time. Hack anything that knows anything about you that you CAN hack. Make WAR on information society.
Like throwing chaff and dropping bombs at the same time.

Or live in a cave. Stay there. I would bring a lot of water, canned food, and a rocket launcher.

"Privacy" is a poor mans excuse for ACTUAL FREEDOM to begin with.

p.s just stop PAYING for shit, or taxes,.....that will clear up 99% of the problem.

p.p.s uhm,........good luck with that.

"Affective Computing Group" -kewl.