You have a loony definition of "privacy"
Ad hominem attacks don't advance your case (and that's obviously false or I would have posted as AC...), and your analogies don't hold water.
I don't give out my unlisted number, I forward a voip number to it so I can change providers without the hassle of porting... but there's also nobody other than the telco (and the NSA ;)) aggregating the details of who I call, and they're not reselling it. Clearly they're doing nothing useful with it or they wouldn't have tried to sell me a LD plan to go with those 0 minutes of long distance I use...
Similarly, while Fedex/UPS/USPS/[your delivery company of choice] could probably build a profile of me based on the size/weight of packages they deliver and where they're delivered from... they don't.
On the other hand Google* is unbashedly all about profiling people. That's their bread and butter. It's silly to think that they wouldn't take advantage of a situation like I described in the GP post.
Hey, maybe you're on facebook, linkedin, flickr, or the trillion-and-one other social networking sites. If there's enough of your personal info out there already, then maybe being trackable despite noscript/adblock/taco/betterprivacy is fine with you as well.
It's not fine with me. I like to choose what information I give out about myself. I know that changing my IP address doesn't give me anonymity in any substantial sense (my ISP probably has proxy logs, certainly DHCP logs, if I was doing something nefarious it wouldn't be hard to connect the dots), but for now they're not who I'm worried about.
I realize Slashdot is large and diverse, and that it's silly to talk about the views express on it as if they were consistent, but people get up in arms at the idea of an internet-accessible ID for a computer. A static /64 for a residence might as well be the same thing.
* I don't mean to keep harping on them, they're just a convenient example.