This is... not great. It's crucial that these records be open to public inspection. But instant full-text search of the entire dockets of 630M cases feels wrong, invasive, and dangerous to me. It's yet another instance of panopticon surveillance now being too cheap to meter. I think our society needs to come to grips with this new reality and figure out what to do about it. Or are we all just cool with this?
I couldn't find my name. And i know it should be in here. So I'm not that worried yet...
Show HN: Full text search on 630M US court cases
71–80 of 289 posts
Re: Show HN: Full text search on 630M US court cases
#72Fantastic. Love it. Wish I could download the whole 630M DB, not just 700K cases from Texas. I especially love the interface. It's light and fast. Not unnecessarily burdened by JavaScript. Bravo to that.
Re: Show HN: Full text search on 630M US court cases
#73This is amazing. Can you share any info on how you were able to compile so much info from different sources? In my limited experience of hunting for legal filings, it seemed like every court had its own system, with nothing standardized or programmatic. Thanks!
The search uses elasticsearch 7 for full text search. It's been extremely fast and worked very well. You're right court data is scattered across many different systems and needs to be aggregated, which is a difficult process.
Re: Show HN: Full text search on 630M US court cases
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
These records have always been available to people with money to spend on a lawyer with a subscription. So what you're complaining about is that normal people can also access the information now.
Nice false equivalence. Lawyer: duty-bound professional, is an officer of the court, can be publicly disbarred, very expensive degree that needs to be paid off Some guy on the internet with an axe to grind: ???
Re: Show HN: Full text search on 630M US court cases
#75Who made this site? How is it funded? They don't reveal themselves afaict. Why should I trust it?
Re: Show HN: Full text search on 630M US court cases
#76This is... not great. It's crucial that these records be open to public inspection. But instant full-text search of the entire dockets of 630M cases feels wrong, invasive, and dangerous to me. It's yet another instance of panopticon surveillance now being too cheap to meter. I think our society needs to come to grips with this new reality and figure out what to do about it. Or are we all just cool with this?
Re: Show HN: Full text search on 630M US court cases
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
The search uses elasticsearch 7 for full text search. It's been extremely fast and worked very well. You're right court data is scattered across many different systems and needs to be aggregated, which is a difficult process.
How much ram does that use up? What’s the latency? Is it sharded? Is it a cluster? So many questions
Re: Show HN: Full text search on 630M US court cases
#78Here's Steve Jobs' speeding ticket: https://www.judyrecords.com/record/vde11sdzw25ac
Was trying to find speeding tickets of John von Neumann, but in vain. It would be nice if one could limit search by years.
Re: Show HN: Full text search on 630M US court cases
#79Mind sharing info on server, backend, costs etc?
Re: Show HN: Full text search on 630M US court cases
#80Here's Steve Jobs' speeding ticket: https://www.judyrecords.com/record/vde11sdzw25ac
Was trying to find speeding tickets of John von Neumann, but in vain. It would be nice if one could limit search by years.