The problem is that people seek to expand what the word privacy is all about. We are not talking about two people, home alone, whispering a secret to each other. If I go to the grocery store the items I buy are in plain view in a public space. If i use a debit card to pay for the groceries I have shared that data with banks, the grocery store and god knows who else. It is not private information. So if the data is sold to my life insurance company or my medical insurance company why should I gripe? After all, the purpose of privacy should not be to deceive others who have a financial interest in my health and longevity.
Now the second layer of use should kick in. Suppose I buy about five quarts of vodka every week. If that data is mined and passed along to the local police force it might pay to have them make note of the times when my car pulls into my driveway. A sudden police stop as I approached my home and a field sobriety test administered making certain that I do not drive impaired. If that five quarts of vodka is for my personal use you could place a bet that i drive drunk most of the time. Wouldn't it be nice to know the alcohol habits of your surgeon or even your lawyer? And again when you buy liquor at a liquor store it is a public transaction in every sense of the word. Surveillance is only a problem when individuals or companies are not allowed to do what the government does. Equality must extend to data mining and analysis.