The problem is that definitions are changed. Usages change.
The question is one of what the words meant when they were written.
Admittedly, a lot of law is sloppy, but that is on the legislatures.
The Constitution isn't sloppy, and the principles, if drawn from the usages and meanings of the words at the time it was written, can be applied to even the technological changes that have happened since by addressing the principles involved.
Just as no one has any right to read your mail (a felony) without a warrant, so too should your electronic communications not posted for public view be protected. Simple as that. (4th Amendment).
Language is inherently sloppy. Furthermore, there is always the issue of how to integrate disparate provisions, which were drafted separately, but which must operate on the same set of facts in some fashion. Oftentimes, there are no rules of operation that dictate how competing provisions interact, and the courts are frequently called upon to resolve those issues.
The old canard used to illustrate latent ambiguities is the one about a law that defines the felony of burglary to be "breaking and entering the close of another at night with the intent to commit a felony therein."
At first glance, "at night" seems to be a pretty unambiguous term, but it isn't. All can agree that for these purposes the day is broken into two periods: night and not-night. That then leads to the question: when does "night" begin, and when does it end?
Is it defined merely by the clock, and if so, what time on the clock is to be used, or does it depend on the level of ambient light at the time in question? If 6pm is chosen as the fixed boundary for when "night" begins, then there will be plenty of break-ins during the summer that don't count as burglaries, and plenty of break-ins that happen during the winter, when everyone is still up and about, that will count as burglaries.
On the other hand, if it is defined on the basis of ambient light, how little light must remain before it becomes "night"?
All of these issues are latent ambiguities that are inherent in the language itself.