Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DHS is using obscure law to snoop on journalists, non-profits, unions

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 114 posts

Re: DHS is using obscure law to snoop on journalists, non-profits, unions

#51

Post by hackyhacky »

mmooss wrote: post #30
hackyhacky wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The thing is nobody has to comply with 1509 summons, DHS has to go to court to enforce it. You're not wrong, but companies such as Google make business decisions, not moral decisions. It's far easier and cheaper for them to comply, while there is basically no incentive for them to fight the summons. Especially given the current administration's proven record of taking retaliation against anyone who stands in their…

The OP contradicts your theory: "In Fort’s case, Google did not comply with the summons for any of the accounts. The company responded to the DHS by saying it had not offered evidence of how it was related to a customs investigation." > companies such as Google make business decisions, not moral decisions The world is more complicated than that; they make both kinds of decisions and many decisions aren't clearly in o…

> human responsibility

Not sure what this means. I think you meant to write "fiduciary duty": the company's board have an affirmative legal obligation to act in the interest of stockholders, regardless of moral impact.

Re: DHS is using obscure law to snoop on journalists, non-profits, unions

#52

Post by xocnad »

deathanatos wrote: post #49
charcircuit wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My viewpoint is that we should eventually have AI be assisting in determining if a search is reasonable in the moment. If there is an actual constitutional violation that that happens it can be resolved after the fact. So for simple cases you could get the equivalent of a warrant in under 10 seconds. By increasing efficiency and decreasing cost it allows for both higher quality, consistent, and wide spread law enforc…

> My viewpoint is that we should eventually have AI be assisting in determining if a search is reasonable in the moment. That is truly bananas. Whose AI? Trained on what data? We've had numerous studies show how AIs can be biased, and a police dept. is going to choose whatever AI "works best for them" — i.e., keeps most out of their way. You can see Flock for examples here: despite requiring justification for searche…

And you are not even addressing how easily a model could hide all kinds of special treatment - either way - at the whim of its creators, be they the government or some outside "trusted" party

Re: DHS is using obscure law to snoop on journalists, non-profits, unions

#53

Post by charcircuit »

deathanatos wrote: post #49
charcircuit wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My viewpoint is that we should eventually have AI be assisting in determining if a search is reasonable in the moment. If there is an actual constitutional violation that that happens it can be resolved after the fact. So for simple cases you could get the equivalent of a warrant in under 10 seconds. By increasing efficiency and decreasing cost it allows for both higher quality, consistent, and wide spread law enforc…

> My viewpoint is that we should eventually have AI be assisting in determining if a search is reasonable in the moment. That is truly bananas. Whose AI? Trained on what data? We've had numerous studies show how AIs can be biased, and a police dept. is going to choose whatever AI "works best for them" — i.e., keeps most out of their way. You can see Flock for examples here: despite requiring justification for searche…

>Whose AI? Trained on what data? The government. Trained on data to maximize accuracy and minimize constitutional violations.

>We've had numerous studies show how AIs can be biased, and a police dept. is going to choose whatever AI "works best for them"

Violating the constitution means that evidence gets thrown out in court and the victims get financially rewarded. It is not in the police's interest to violate people's rights.

>the AI would similarly be given bad or falsified inputs.

And then those cops should be severely punished for intentionally violating people's constitutional rights.

>There is no resolution for violating someone's rights

There is already resolution for having your constitutional rights violated. You sue for damages and to have them stop violating your rights.

>no ability to search without a warrant, which isn't true. If circumstances warrant it

There are other situations where it doesn't warrant it which is what we are talking about here. Refer to TFA.

>Part of the point of having a separate branch of government involved, too

And I'm pointing out that this involvement is not needed by the constitution. Branches of government is an arbitrary degree of separation.

Re: DHS is using obscure law to snoop on journalists, non-profits, unions

#54

Post by charcircuit »

xocnad wrote: post #52
deathanatos wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My viewpoint is that we should eventually have AI be assisting in determining if a search is reasonable in the moment. That is truly bananas. Whose AI? Trained on what data? We've had numerous studies show how AIs can be biased, and a police dept. is going to choose whatever AI "works best for them" — i.e., keeps most out of their way. You can see Flock for examples here: despite requiring justification for searche…

And you are not even addressing how easily a model could hide all kinds of special treatment - either way - at the whim of its creators, be they the government or some outside "trusted" party

Judges can hide all sorts of special treatment too. At least with a model as opposed to a soul we can study it and improve it.

Re: DHS is using obscure law to snoop on journalists, non-profits, unions

#56

Post by p_j_w »

charcircuit wrote: post #43
shevy-java wrote: post #22

Welcome to the dictatorship. One has to wonder whether all Trump voters wanted this. I don't think so.

Wanted what? Government agencies to efficiently be able to obtain subpoenas. I want that.

You want them to be able to snoop on journalists and unions without showing any sort of criminal behavior? Definitely checking those Republican boxes.

Re: DHS is using obscure law to snoop on journalists, non-profits, unions

#57

Post by wavewrangler »

charcircuit wrote: post #43
shevy-java wrote: post #22

Welcome to the dictatorship. One has to wonder whether all Trump voters wanted this. I don't think so.

Wanted what? Government agencies to efficiently be able to obtain subpoenas. I want that.

You’re replacing the issue with a different one. This is not about whether agencies should be able to use lawful subpoenas efficiently. It is about DHS using 19 U.S.C. §1509—customs-import summons authority to demand records concerning journalists, nonprofits, and unions without prior judicial approval, while requesting secrecy. DHS has also reportedly withdrawn demands after they were challenged but before courts could rule on their legality. If you support that specific use of administrative power, say as much. Calling it “efficient subpoenas” does not address how rotten it is with near enough precision, and is intentionally routing around what the actual issue is. Thats exactly the kind of corrupt attitude that government has embraced and why this is even a story.

Re: DHS is using obscure law to snoop on journalists, non-profits, unions

#58

Post by xocnad »

charcircuit wrote: post #54
xocnad wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you are not even addressing how easily a model could hide all kinds of special treatment - either way - at the whim of its creators, be they the government or some outside "trusted" party

Judges can hide all sorts of special treatment too. At least with a model as opposed to a soul we can study it and improve it.

Indeed they can but they are in some ways like an individual model per judge, albeit with a sub-optimal interface and very slow, but at least they are hard to game in mass.

Re: DHS is using obscure law to snoop on journalists, non-profits, unions

#59

Post by JuniperMesos »

p_j_w wrote: post #56
charcircuit wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wanted what? Government agencies to efficiently be able to obtain subpoenas. I want that.

You want them to be able to snoop on journalists and unions without showing any sort of criminal behavior? Definitely checking those Republican boxes.

> In February of this year, federal prosecutors twice sought search warrants for account information for the YouTube channel of Fort and the journalist Don Lemon, both of whom have pleaded not guilty to criminal charges in connection to a protest at a Minneapolis church in January that they were covering.

The incident in question involved Lemon and Fort participating in a anti-ICE protest that involved disrupting a church service, and then after getting arrested for disrupting the church service claiming that they were just journalists reporting on the protest and therefore their arrest was immoral and illegal.

I do actually think that pro-immigration-enforcement people want anti-immigration-enforcement people who participate in disruptive protests over the issue to get punished by the criminal justice system for this, in order to dissuade them from disrupting other people's private events; and further that they do not want "being a journalist" to be a mitigating factor for this kind of disruption. If you want the criminal justice system to treat disrupting other people's private events as a crime, even if they claim it's for a protest and that their status as journalists makes this ok, then you do in fact want the criminal justice system to investigate people who commit those acts of disruption.

Post reply on HN