Terry Gross Interview - Interpreting the constitution in the digital Era

Facts:

1. The Supreme Court is currently dealing with a case on the legality of the Police force placing a GPS tracking device on a car without a warrant. 
2. The biggest question is what is the difference of tracking for 10 to 100 miles compared to tracking for a month.
3. Jeff Rosen believes that there is a necessity for translation of the Constitution.
4.  In his essay, in Constitution 3.0, he shows a story of a world at the time of 2025, where people have the ability to know what you are doing and where you are 24/7, via security camera and things like such.
5. Google Maps became controversial when it started taking 'street view' picture, because it is a possible invasion of privacy.
6.  In Germany the decided that they would not let Google because of their strict laws on data gathering.
7.  It would be possible for Facebook and Google to team up and stream every surveillance camera in the world in the future.
8.  Some countries have recognized a "right to oblivion" that allows people to take down pictures of themselves that they don't want off the Internet.
9.  Criminals are using brain scans showing overactive amygdalas as proof that they cannot control themselves. 
10. The lines regarding privacy, adhering or breaking, are very different between American and Europe, as the two have very different policies on data gathering.

Q's:

1. Where is the line in invasion of privacy?
2. If Police GPS tracking is unconstitutional, is radar detector constitutional?
3. How can the supreme court react?
4. What is the general view of the citizens?
5. Is the government taking it too far?