Do you really have a right to privacy?

In Carroll v. United States, the Supreme Court held that vehicles were held to a lesser standard of Fourth Amendment protection by stating that a warrant was not required. Then, in Katz v. United States, the Court established the right to privacy as a defense against warrantless searches. Fast forward to 45 years after the Katz decision and we have the United States v. Jones case. This case was an appeal from the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals that went on to the Supreme Court, on the issue of whether a warrant is needed to attach a GPS tracking device to a vehicle.

Well, now......what about your computer and what you do in your free time on it from the comforts of your home?

Review these three cases by selecting the name of each case, above. Then, select one of the following links (or one of your choosing) for review and discussion regarding one's right to privacy on Facebook and social media sites.  

https://www.boscolegal.org/blog/social-media-case-law-us-v-meregildo/

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/privacy-and-data-security/facebook-data-release-to-cops-evades-fourth-amendment-limits

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/health-law-and-business/nebraska-abortion-probe-and-search-warrants-for-data-explained

Based on the Court's interpretation of the right to privacy under the Fourth Amendment, should a warrant be required to obtain any and all information that you may have on Facebook or other social media sites? Why or why not?

Assuming that a warrant is required, what are the exceptions to this requirement that might apply when the government legally can proceed without the necessity of a warrant?
Are there any ways to get around the warrant requirement?  Give an example.
Is "privacy" a thing of the past or shall it forever last?