Don't worry. The constitutional proscription is only against the official adoption of a state religion...
(And save me from the followers of his prophets who would otherwise restrict my liberties.)
They are not tasked with keeping us safe; they are tasked with 'safeguarding our liberties'.
Safeguarding liberty by breaking through a constitutional boundary... That's a hot one! Thanks for the belly laugh.
The Bill of Rights is the set of proscriptions deemed necessary by the founders to ensure that the citizenry was protected from the tyranny of its own unrestricted government. The fourth amendment was enshrined to limit police power to that which could be rationally supported by evidence of wrong doing. I.E., the wrong doing must logical occur prior to the collection of evidence, in a system where provision against 'unreasonable search' is in force. Blanket surveillance of all electronic communications for as many channels as possible is so completely beyond the pale of reason for anyone who claims knowledge of liberty, that it's hard to believe anyone would question the legitimacy of such an attempt. But here it is...
Apparently geeks only require security for their own personal data or that of their company and believe everyone else's is better off left wide open.
It also means you need to know a little about nature as well, knowledge it's sometimes difficult to develop in a technology smitten world.
Which is the dependent variable, technology or nature? Which one can be perfected? If you can answer the last one, please don't study business.
By definition, the reason the price of ____ is ____ is because, "that is what the market will bear."
Fundamentally, the idea that neoclassical economics should be allowed to determine the course of human events or the development of civilization has revealed itself to be false. That's the upshot of The Enlightenment as viewed from the midst of the third wave of globalization wrapped in the second wave of industrialization, just before the shit hits the impeller. So the question becomes how to identify the necessary set of values which should replace those that were misidentifed and championed by the Cult of Adam Smith's Incredibly Invisible Hand.
It's officially one world now, according to all good wealthy western outsourcerers, and unless we're going to discriminate against those born to poverty and abandon them to the accident of birth, then redirecting the behemoth will require sacrifice from the first world to the rest. That means subsidized technological development where it's necessary to equalize the chasm of poverty, population decreases and environmental remediation to preserve the ecological integrity of a global system that's in decline and real discussion about what will characterize a heathy, sustainable system of natural and interconnected artifical human systems. It implies far better cooperation than the UN framework for (fill-in-the-blank).
Electrifying rural everwhere, if it can actually done with a net negative impact would be great. If it can't be done without increasing "globalization" as we have come to know it, then it won't matter much in 3 or 4 generations because the catastrophes associated with environmental degradation will include reductions in agricultural output, famine and social dystonia. Since we've "decided" that the natural world is the defacto sewer of industrial man, you can bet that increased envronmental stresses will usher in decreased health to go along with a few panicked incidences of pestilence requiring a little martial law. Don't be afraid, it will all be done for the good of all.
I can't say I believe any of these entrepreneurislisms holds much promise on its own, especially when they are measured in isolation. But if there is hope to be found in any of them, it will become apparent when any of them can be shown to fit into a systemic paradigm with multiple attributes that allow for energy efficiency, reduced environmental pollution, distributed and sustainable local economic development and reduced climatological impacts and a renewed respect man as an ecological participant as well as a social being. We need to establish a new metric for an acceptable level of the energetics of civilization, in much the same way scientists determine the needs of other biological species. Better yet, in the manner of parasitology which requires knowledge of interrelated species and their ecologies.
When you look at today's developments in that light, it's all quite simple.