Live data from Hacker News

Twitter's response to US Government search warrant (turned over deleted DMs) [pdf]

dcd.uscourts.gov

21–30 of 125 posts

Re: Twitter's response to US Government search warrant (turned over deleted DMs) [pdf]

#21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Twitter seems to either not be able to discover that, or can't find it They clearly CAN, but don't want to. Their (X's lawyers) objections in the transcript are ridiculous (they claimed they don't have an "affiliated account" category - like really?!?) and when pressed for timeframes suddenly they can produce "impossible" data in less than 24h.

Was Twitter really as sophisticated as Facebook in this regard? If @realdonaldtrump and @johnbarron are both tweeting from the same IP in the same time frame, could Twitter make the connection that both are the same user? Was there enough backtracking stored in their systems to know that?

They may not have a literal field for the account, but they are asking twitter to run a simple join across database fields for matching IP addresses in the time range. The jusge is clearly fed up with twitters bullshit - the control F comment does actually make a lot of sense, it should be that simple. For example, SELECT * FROM dms WHERE ip=donaldtrumpsaccountip

Re: Twitter's response to US Government search warrant (turned over deleted DMs) [pdf]

#25
post #9

[flagged]

You mean the data you voluntarily submitted to HN, an organization you don't own or pay for? C'mon. If you want to be forgotten, don't participate in the first place.

[flagged]

Re: Twitter's response to US Government search warrant (turned over deleted DMs) [pdf]

#26
post #2

My favorite part is when the government suggests to Twitter that they should Ctl-F to find 'associated accounts'

What's funny is while the judge might look silly suggesting such a basic technique, Twitter's lawyers were clearly "playing dumb" saying that a search for "realDonaldTrump" produced "millions of emails" and therefore was unreasonable.

Lawyers gonna lawyer, don't expect good intent from them.

Edit, more accurately: do not anthropomorphize lawyers.

Re: Twitter's response to US Government search warrant (turned over deleted DMs) [pdf]

#27
post #6

Trump didn't have the legendary opsec he's supposed to have.

Legendary where? His Twitter password was guessed[1].

Even worse, he used that password across several more services and didn't change them when his Twitter account was compromised. Legendarily bad, perhaps.

1. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2020/12/17/dutch-trump-...

Re: Twitter's response to US Government search warrant (turned over deleted DMs) [pdf]

#28

At this point, Elon's purchase and seemingly-intentional brand-suicide looks more and more like a political favor. I mean, yes, if we shave this with Hanlon's Razor, the outcome is the same, but the rightward swing of Elon's public statements certainly makes this look more like quid-pro-quo than an oopsie.

I am not a fan of Musk or Twitter, but can you substantiate this?

I'm about 1/10th of the way through the transcript and I haven't come to this conclusion yet.

Re: Twitter's response to US Government search warrant (turned over deleted DMs) [pdf]

#30

[flagged]

Given it's a 206 page document that can't be searched, you might consider providing a page number if you're gonna quote it.

If you really want to search it then you can OCR in Foxit or Acrobat and text search after
Post reply on HN