So, now you're gambling with whether or not the spotty evidence is spotty enough to make you look innocent or guilty. Therefore, everyone has something to hide because the whole truth will not always be evident and some partial truths can make you look guilty (ex. your cell phone location was very close to a murder scene. You didn't kill anyone, you walked by the spot a few minutes before it happened).
They ultimately just "trust the government" to do the "right thing" no matter how flawed that thinking is. This is partially the fault of the education system and them not "knowing their history" that well.
It's only when such abuses of privacy happen to them personally that they become ultra-privacy activists. We've seen this even with politicians that fought to expand mass surveillance powers and then did an 180 when they saw those powers were used against them, too (who would've thought?!).
Therefore, it doesn't make a great deal of sense to make all sorts of trade-offs in the name of privacy. There's not much to gain.
If you've been specifically targeted by a state actor, you're going to have a much harder time than if your goal is to resist general dragnet surveillance.
> There's not much to gain.
This ignores whether you've been specifically targeted.
Did you know that law enforcement and justice can request and will try to gain access to data you share with any company?
"Oh, but I have done nothing wrong."
The definition of "nothing wrong" isn't set in stone. It's always up for interpretation. You might feel you're doing nothing wrong, but that doesn't mean authorities will always see it that way.
Remember, in some countries, authorities use your social media to monitor against tax fraud. [1]
[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2018/11/11/tax...
There's always that probability of a change of political or judicial direction towards more invasive measures in your personal life using the data you share with third parties. You can't predict with certainty that in 10 years time you won't be earmarked as a "subversive element" as a result of mass data mining of the same data you happily share on line. Never assume "it won't happen to me."