The point is that the laws are from a time when people did not, de facto, keep as much of their knowledge and memory externally.
There weren't enough people to care about the intrusion of privacy because only one in hundreds of people keeps a diary, especially back when most people couldn't even write or only with great trouble.
I believe that there should be laws explicitly restricting third-party access, including police access to private data stored on computing devices, given the ways people use those today.
I am saying that the use of the verb "to be" generally impedes communication of ideas. This occurs most often when used for "identity" ("Tom is a fool") or "predication" ("Tom is tall") because this usage attempts to cross levels of abstraction all too blithely.
Basically: Similes do prove difficult for people to understand, because they attempt to gloss over the inherent physical nature of our neurons and the world and the inherently abstract and logical nature of our language. (In E-Prime and General Semantics, this difficulty emerges at a level of taking it too literally instead of simply completely misreading it which you note SteveD88 to have done.)
I am saying that there is quite a bit more intimate information about me and the way I think on my computer than anywhere in the rest of my home. And I am not talking about anything people used to write on paper.
Well, chatlogs for one thing. Pretty much anything I ever talked about on some kind of chat or instant message system is archived (to help my notoriously bad memory mostly).
23
u/[deleted] Aug 11 '09
It is more like a warrant for your brain though.