Live data from Hacker News

Googling abortion? Your details aren’t as private as you think

theguardian.com

11–20 of 21 posts

Re: Googling abortion? Your details aren’t as private as you think

#11

Ah, yes ... fear-mongering over what the "red" team might do, while pretending the "blue" team haven't been committing this kind of abuse unchecked for years now. Those abuses are ignored, or worse, reported as a good thing: https://www.wired.com/story/fbi-google-geofence-warrant-janu...

Yeah let's go to a riot with our google location service devices!

Regardless of what they were doing, these people obviously weren't the brightest to be there in the first place. Not surprised they would think airplane mode could protect them.

Re: Googling abortion? Your details aren’t as private as you think

#12
post #11

Ah, yes ... fear-mongering over what the "red" team might do, while pretending the "blue" team haven't been committing this kind of abuse unchecked for years now. Those abuses are ignored, or worse, reported as a good thing: https://www.wired.com/story/fbi-google-geofence-warrant-janu...

Yeah let's go to a riot with our google location service devices! Regardless of what they were doing, these people obviously weren't the brightest to be there in the first place. Not surprised they would think airplane mode could protect them.

Yes, they are the stupid ones worthy of ridicule and scorn for taking a device specifically designed to hoover and exfiltrate as much data as possible for monetization and value extraction purposes.

The people who made these systems, trading off people's right to privacy, and implementing them in a way where you can't actually find out how shit works without months of digging through convoluted, constantly changing API's/toolchains of course are beyond reproach.

The tech industry's detachment from any semblance of normalcy or humanity never ceases to amaze.

Re: Googling abortion? Your details aren’t as private as you think

#13
post #5

Quoted post unavailable.

> worthy of being allowed to grow up into the person they would have become .... prematurely ending the life of a human being This assumes that the zygote or fetus — if it were sentient and capable of choice — would want the particular future into which it would be born. It also assumes that legislators and, ultimately, voters should peremptorily impose a Procrustean-bed rule [0] even before viability. The "least bad…

> would want the particular future into which it would be born

Ahh I see, so its a unilateral mercy killing?

Re: Googling abortion? Your details aren’t as private as you think

#14
post #6

Quoted post unavailable.

>If only a zygote could hold up a sign saying "my body my choice", maybe then they'd be considered worthy of being allowed to grow up into the person they would have become. Well, as you said, it is a not person they would theoretically become had the pregnancy continued. It is zygote. > if somebody googled 'how to end someone's life' do you think that should be noted by anyone? E In fact, you can google that and no…

You can split hairs about what a zygote is to make yourself not feel like it's murder but the procedure results in the net loss of one or more human lives.

Re: Googling abortion? Your details aren’t as private as you think

#15
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> worthy of being allowed to grow up into the person they would have become .... prematurely ending the life of a human being This assumes that the zygote or fetus — if it were sentient and capable of choice — would want the particular future into which it would be born. It also assumes that legislators and, ultimately, voters should peremptorily impose a Procrustean-bed rule [0] even before viability. The "least bad…

> would want the particular future into which it would be born Ahh I see, so its a unilateral mercy killing?

> a unilateral mercy killing

I can't stop you from describing it that way, of course. But that description presupposes that, always and everywhere, the potential person, i.e., the zygote/fetus, must be valued more highly than the actual, currently-living person in whose uterus the zygote/fetus is gestating.

You're free to believe that if you want — just as you're likewise free to believe (as an extreme example) that the human race would be better off if all important decisions were made by the British monarch, or white Christian males, or a council of imams, or the emperor of Russia, or the Chinese Communist Party, etc.

But you should expect major pushback if you insist that everyone else must defer to your belief — especially if, in their judgment, doing so would drastically degrade their lives.

Again: The least-bad option is: 1) to recognize that the pregnancy-continuation decision is often best made on a case by case basis and not with a one-size-fits-all rule; and 2) in most cases — certainly pre-viability, and in some cases, even post-viability — to entrust that decision to the mother and her doctor.

Re: Googling abortion? Your details aren’t as private as you think

#16
post #12
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah let's go to a riot with our google location service devices! Regardless of what they were doing, these people obviously weren't the brightest to be there in the first place. Not surprised they would think airplane mode could protect them.

Yes, they are the stupid ones worthy of ridicule and scorn for taking a device specifically designed to hoover and exfiltrate as much data as possible for monetization and value extraction purposes. The people who made these systems, trading off people's right to privacy, and implementing them in a way where you can't actually find out how shit works without months of digging through convoluted, constantly changing A…

The Dems have found a loophole.

As private companies, big tech can legally suppress speech and censor anything the Dems dont like.

And in return the Dems allow them to retain their monopolies and massively unethical business practices.

I dont see this ending well.

Re: Googling abortion? Your details aren’t as private as you think

#17
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If only a zygote could hold up a sign saying "my body my choice", maybe then they'd be considered worthy of being allowed to grow up into the person they would have become. Well, as you said, it is a not person they would theoretically become had the pregnancy continued. It is zygote. > if somebody googled 'how to end someone's life' do you think that should be noted by anyone? E In fact, you can google that and no…

You can split hairs about what a zygote is to make yourself not feel like it's murder but the procedure results in the net loss of one or more human lives.

The same goes for unused sperm and egg.

Plus, unless of course it is saving life of an actual human. Or just preventing destruction of it and harm.

Re: Googling abortion? Your details aren’t as private as you think

#18
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If only a zygote could hold up a sign saying "my body my choice", maybe then they'd be considered worthy of being allowed to grow up into the person they would have become. Well, as you said, it is a not person they would theoretically become had the pregnancy continued. It is zygote. > if somebody googled 'how to end someone's life' do you think that should be noted by anyone? E In fact, you can google that and no…

You can split hairs about what a zygote is to make yourself not feel like it's murder but the procedure results in the net loss of one or more human lives.

1-0=1

Re: Googling abortion? Your details aren’t as private as you think

#19
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can split hairs about what a zygote is to make yourself not feel like it's murder but the procedure results in the net loss of one or more human lives.

The same goes for unused sperm and egg. Plus, unless of course it is saving life of an actual human. Or just preventing destruction of it and harm.

No post body was provided.

Re: Googling abortion? Your details aren’t as private as you think

#20
post #16
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, they are the stupid ones worthy of ridicule and scorn for taking a device specifically designed to hoover and exfiltrate as much data as possible for monetization and value extraction purposes. The people who made these systems, trading off people's right to privacy, and implementing them in a way where you can't actually find out how shit works without months of digging through convoluted, constantly changing A…

The Dems have found a loophole. As private companies, big tech can legally suppress speech and censor anything the Dems dont like. And in return the Dems allow them to retain their monopolies and massively unethical business practices. I dont see this ending well.

Lol the fact you think its just one political party doing this is laughable.
Post reply on HN