Google clearly thinks it is above the law.
Which law in this case?
Be specific, what law requires them to not treat particular healthcare facilities differently with regards to data collection?
Roe's overturn is tech's privacy apocalypse
21–30 of 215 posts
Re: Roe's overturn is tech's privacy apocalypse
#22> A sudden gap in location data could itself be used as evidence in court.
Google should drop visits to particularly personal locations, but they should also just ignore everything except the 10-15 places you visit the most. I have to believe they care much more about the fact that I go to the same Trader Joe's every week than that I went to a plumbing supply warehouse one time last year. This would provide a good screen for those sudden gaps in location data, and wouldn't noticeably affect the marketing applications of their precious, precious user profiles.
Re: Roe's overturn is tech's privacy apocalypse
#23I still don't understand how the Roe = privacy take has been legitimate when the US has completely ignored the privacy of its citizens in many other contexts, including decades of the NSA and other alphabet agencies spying on us.
Granted, I would love there to be an explicitly stated right to privacy from government (up to some limitations determined by the courts, e.g. when government needs to investigate, say, an actual murder (and not one of a fetus, just my opinion)). But obviously there is no such right when looking at the actual actions of the government which are de facto 'legal' as nothing is being done about it, no one is being punished.
Re: Roe's overturn is tech's privacy apocalypse
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd be a little more accurate and say extreme neoliberalism has exacerbated the failings of the USA.
Neoconservatism too. Let's not forget about Bush, Blair, Powell and Iraq...
Neoliberalism is an economic philosophy. It's not tied to "progressivism" or "conservatism". In short, it promotes free-market economics without borders.
Re: Roe's overturn is tech's privacy apocalypse
#25Plenty of uproar after Roe v Wade overturning, even here in the EU but.. The real shame is leaving lawmaking to the courts due to political opportunism.
I am fully in favor of legalized abortion, but why was it never codified in law?
Not a priority according to democratic politicians. Not a priority. So, you reap what you sow if you ask me.
I learned that many countries, including my own, made, and make that mistake as well. On many topics.
Re: Roe's overturn is tech's privacy apocalypse
#26Google clearly thinks it is above the law.
Which law in this case? Be specific, what law requires them to not treat particular healthcare facilities differently with regards to data collection?
Not tampering with evidence? [1]
Re: Roe's overturn is tech's privacy apocalypse
#27Is this anything more than just fear-mongering? I don't see how this is related to the Roe reversal at all. Not a single state has given any inkling of ruling/law aimed at prosecuting the receiver of the abortion, only doctors/person who performs them. Privacy is good and these issues should be evaluated, but to talk about them in the context of the recent Supreme Court decision is dishonest.
You've got the de facto situation in Texas though. Anyone being allowed to sue you for getting an abortion effectively means that the "state" can come after you. Make no mistake, these laws aim to harm anyone involved. The entire context of this discussion stems from the decision. You're wrong, and frankly, a little churlish.
Re: Roe's overturn is tech's privacy apocalypse
#28Is this anything more than just fear-mongering? I don't see how this is related to the Roe reversal at all. Not a single state has given any inkling of ruling/law aimed at prosecuting the receiver of the abortion, only doctors/person who performs them. Privacy is good and these issues should be evaluated, but to talk about them in the context of the recent Supreme Court decision is dishonest.
>but to talk about them in the context of the recent Supreme Court decision is dishonest
I disagree, this is an example of why data collection can be scary.
Data that was perfectly inane yesterday can be used against people tomorrow. How much data do the powers-that-be have access to that can be used similarly in the future? The dystopian view is that they'll be able to paint any narrative if you fall in their crosshairs. Of course who "they" are is subject to change.
Re: Roe's overturn is tech's privacy apocalypse
#29Is this anything more than just fear-mongering? I don't see how this is related to the Roe reversal at all. Not a single state has given any inkling of ruling/law aimed at prosecuting the receiver of the abortion, only doctors/person who performs them. Privacy is good and these issues should be evaluated, but to talk about them in the context of the recent Supreme Court decision is dishonest.
No post body was provided.
Re: Roe's overturn is tech's privacy apocalypse
#30Is this anything more than just fear-mongering? I don't see how this is related to the Roe reversal at all. Not a single state has given any inkling of ruling/law aimed at prosecuting the receiver of the abortion, only doctors/person who performs them. Privacy is good and these issues should be evaluated, but to talk about them in the context of the recent Supreme Court decision is dishonest.
Women have been prosecuted for miscarriages before, it's not baseless.
https://www.npr.org/2022/07/03/1109015302/abortion-prosecuti...