91–100 of 117 posts
Does this have like a option to email them to delete all your data, prolly not huh?
This is likely largely useless unless they have significant private sources of data. Publicly available data is exempt from deletion.
It's pretty crazy that our legislators and courts haven't addressed this loophole that allows law enforcement agencies to buy data that they can't legally collect. This essentially nullifies the fourth amendment.
I was flagrantly misidentified by Lexis Nexis and subsequently a recipient of a pittance resulting from a class action lawsuit many years later. I had to pay for and live out of hotels for several weeks due to their background check connecting me to a person from a state I had never lived in with a middle name and middle initial that was not even same. The most dystopian part of this is that they aren’t good at the s…
One of those salary check services they run has me working as a Civil Engineer in upstate New York, while I was in high school.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Legislation. What is there to keep a food company from lying about the ingredients in their products? How could you stop it, unless you have a personal chemistry lab? You stop it by having people who constantly watch how you do business, and if you do it in a harmful way men with guns will come and shut down your business and take a lot of money out of your vault. If it was exceptionally harmful or you resisted or if…
> What is there to keep a food company from lying about the ingredients in their products? Food companies are not part of the "intelligence community," and there are significant disparities between enforcement of and compliance with the rules that each must follow. To the degree that food companies are even scared of the FDA (and not just willing to risk an inconsequential fine), it's because they know the FDA has st…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's very rare for a crime to be truly unsolvable. For the vast majority it's all about the amount of time and effort the authorities want to put in. License plate readers or not, if your local PD and the DA's office have decided to deprioritize auto thefts then there's nothing you can do about it.
Illegal immigration could easily be solved by giving anyone who hires undocumented workers a million dollar fine. The American economy relies on a cheap, obedient and disposable class of workers.
1. you really want to solve illegal immigration: extremely large fine and 1 year felony sentence for hiring an illegal immigrant without running their ID through e-verify
2. If we wanted to really do something about climate change we would have a huge investment in nuclear power plants dotting the US country side.
-->1 I point out to show that I think it's all a smoke and mirrors game with GQP politicians. We need a worker visa program and completely revamped immigration system
-->2 I am completely serious about.
It's pretty crazy that our legislators and courts haven't addressed this loophole that allows law enforcement agencies to buy data that they can't legally collect. This essentially nullifies the fourth amendment.
> This essentially nullifies the fourth amendment. Courts seem to think that this information does not have an expectation of privacy since the user gave it away.
It's pretty crazy that our legislators and courts haven't addressed this loophole that allows law enforcement agencies to buy data that they can't legally collect. This essentially nullifies the fourth amendment.
It's by design. The politicians love the money from GEO Group, CoreCivic, and MTC for expanding prisons and incarcerating more poor people and minorities for minor infractions. I'm sure the politicians absolutely hate money from LexisNexus too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For emails in the cloud, and probably other data, they don't need a warrant if it's 6 months or older anyways. So they probably can force them to give it out for free. But either way they have a black budget so we are fucked in many ways. https://emailserverprovider.com/emails-texts-documents-older...
It's no longer that black and white since US v. Carpenter. It needs someone to try it again. In that case SCOTUS did cite Warshak[1], which while not binding over the whole nation, is persuasive and clearly the older 2018 SCOTUS showed their potential interest in ending the Third Party Doctrine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_doctrine [1] https://www.huntonprivacyblog.com/2010/12/17/court-finds-fou...