Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

chicagotribune.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 447 posts

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#21

Post by zadokshi »

Is this different in any practical sense to an old fashioned request for physical paper documents?

The only difference I can think of is traditionally documents are destroyed after they are no longer needed. Now they can see “deleted” documents and document change history.

i.e. emails stored locally on a personal or company server can be permanently destroyed. Traditional email systems won’t have a change history of the email writing process)

(I imagine all sorts of games could be played by lawyers with access to this additional types of information.)

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#22

Post by guelo »

buboard wrote: post #16

at what point does this projection of judicial power against individuals in the name of safety (whose safety? whats really at stake here even?) become terrorism?

A bit of an aside. Terrorism is a useless word now besides its propaganda value. The USA just declares whoever they don't like to be a terrorist, like how they just did to Iran's army, and now apparently they can legally assassinate any Iranian soldier. What's funny is Iran wants in on this propaganda game now, they designated the US army as terrorists.

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#23

Post by keanzu »

zadokshi wrote: post #21

Is this different in any practical sense to an old fashioned request for physical paper documents? The only difference I can think of is traditionally documents are destroyed after they are no longer needed. Now they can see “deleted” documents and document change history. i.e. emails stored locally on a personal or company server can be permanently destroyed. Traditional email systems won’t have a change history of…

Quality of the record keeping is vastly higher. Imagine a subpoena for every paper mail you sent in a year. You can't get that from the US Postal service.

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#24

Post by paxys »

abbadadda wrote: post #10
0xADADA wrote: post #3

I (and we should all) act as if this could happen to anyone. Essentially that the state can deputize any company to snitch on the digital ephemera that constitutes our daily lives, but especially those that we are deeply engaged: Google, Facebook, Lyft, Amazon. As such, we should not self-censor, but instead disengage from these proxy-cops and move to more distributed spaces.

Queue the Google alternative posts. This is some terrifying stuff. > not just emails but also drafted and deleted messages; any files in their Google Drive cloud storage services; any Google Voice texts, calls and contacts; search and web browsing history; and location data.

The scariest part is that this amount of data access can be very effectively weaponized to build a strong case against anyone. All of us are inadvertently breaking some law or the other all the time. If the government doesn't like you for any reason they are one court order away from blackmailing you or putting you away.

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#26

Post by akiselev »

alexfromapex wrote: post #14
akiselev wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The courts are the legal restriction. The way in which the evidence collected can be challenge in the appellate courts.

I realize that didn’t expect to be taken so literally.

Ambiguity isn't always an effective rhetorical device, especially on an internet that has fallen prey to the law of averages.

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#27

Post by dragonwriter »

alexfromapex wrote: post #12
munk-a wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know why you think there aren't any legal restrictions - this wasn't a random LEO going cowboy and trying to hack into google, a judge directly ordered this action and signed onto the warrants.

I mean as far as privacy is concerned. They were able to request all text messages, documents, location data, voicemails without any stipulation that they were relevant to the case.

The court order is the determination that the information has enough probability of being relevant that it needs to be turned over to be reviewed.

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#28

Post by IfOnlyYouKnew »

buboard wrote: post #16

at what point does this projection of judicial power against individuals in the name of safety (whose safety? whats really at stake here even?) become terrorism?

At the time when libertarian lunatics figure out how to convince enough people to change the accepted meaning of the word "terrorism"?

I mean... you obviously don't like this, and many people agree, on very reasonable grounds. But it just is not terrorism.

It's sort of how boiled mushrooms are not "death", even though I have equal affinity to both concepts.

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#29

Post by ars »

abbadadda wrote: post #10
0xADADA wrote: post #3

I (and we should all) act as if this could happen to anyone. Essentially that the state can deputize any company to snitch on the digital ephemera that constitutes our daily lives, but especially those that we are deeply engaged: Google, Facebook, Lyft, Amazon. As such, we should not self-censor, but instead disengage from these proxy-cops and move to more distributed spaces.

Queue the Google alternative posts. This is some terrifying stuff. > not just emails but also drafted and deleted messages; any files in their Google Drive cloud storage services; any Google Voice texts, calls and contacts; search and web browsing history; and location data.

> Queue the Google alternative posts.

How would that help? They'll just get a warrant for those.

> This is some terrifying stuff.

You have a strange definition of terrifying. This is how the law is supposed to work.

You do realize they can also go in his house and search through his things? Or order his friends to talk? That's what search warrants are.

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#30

Post by avs733 »

drevil-v2 wrote: post #20
0xADADA wrote: post #3

I (and we should all) act as if this could happen to anyone. Essentially that the state can deputize any company to snitch on the digital ephemera that constitutes our daily lives, but especially those that we are deeply engaged: Google, Facebook, Lyft, Amazon. As such, we should not self-censor, but instead disengage from these proxy-cops and move to more distributed spaces.

State has a duty to prosecute law breakers. This is a load bearing wall of civil society. Everywhere. Making sweeping general statements is good for riling up the mobs but I would implore HN readers to be more pragmatic about these things. Look at the context. This person sought to ignite racial tensions for personal gain. He was given a sweetheart deal. The State is going after him and those protected him. They (the…

yes we have seen you know how to make this comment.

Another way to look at that 'duty' is to say [The] state has a responsibility to ensure justice for all. That may seem like the same thing but vagueness is at times valuable given that life rarely satisfies the black and white dichotomies many of us would prefer.

Post reply on HN