>>When through the normal course of using a technology you reveal information to the government (in this case the military) they can use that information against you.

>That’s not the legal standard for searches and seizures under the 4th amendment.

Was Katz overruled?

No the holding/Law is still:

Regardless of the location, a conversation is protected from unreasonable search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment if it is made with a "reasonable expectation of privacy".

The law is not and never was:

>When through the normal course of using a technology you reveal information to the government (in this case the military) they can use that information against you.

I have what I consider to be a reasonable expectation of privacy not to have 3rd party tracking pixels embedded in websites I visit via a secure connection on the internet.

Well I’m not so sure that is a reasonable expectation (certainly visiting a website isn’t the same as an attorney client communication), but either way the 4th amendment only applies to searches and seizures by the government not 3rd party websites.

I fully believe it to be a reasonable expectation which is unfortunately violated daily and routinely often under the nefarious guise of marketing.

Well as I previously mentioned the 4th amendment only protects from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government...reasonable belief or not the 4th amendment isn’t going to protect you from data collected by non-government actors (unless the government directed them to collect it for them).

It's unfortunate that the U.S. has such lack privacy protections compared to Europe.

And it starts with expectations, which our government belittles us for having.