This conflation is made too often. I think the problem with the assumption that if someone made something public willingly they don't care is if people knew the

This conflation is made too often. I think the problem with the assumption that if someone made something public willingly they don't care is if people knew they are under surveillance they may not speak their mind, or speak at all. If people who use the internet expect all their activities to be logged and mined for patterns that can potentially be used against them, they may behave very differently. Since we all act in self interest this means no one will speak freely. This is what surveillance does, this is what the chilling effect is. This reduces the value of the internet for the free exchange of ideas and discussion. People who seek this will have to resort to encryption and other tools and forced to behave in a secretive fashion as if they were doing something wrong. Protests and activism are supposed to be normal part of every democracy and its disconcerting the see the strange discomfort our 'democratic societies' show to activism and the sheer amount of effort devoted to managing it from infiltration to surveillance.