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

Google ‘pressure cooker,’ get a police visit? Maybe not.

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 42 posts

Re: Google ‘pressure cooker,’ get a police visit? Maybe not.

#11

Post by northwest »

MrKurtz wrote: post #8
northwest wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but this fact needs a lot less attention than the state we're currently in, given the ignorance and resulting apathy of the general public.

Huh? they're running a story that implies that the feds or local police can monitor Google searches without evidence, they are cynically exploiting recent headlines to pull traffic. If you want the press to be taken seriously on serious matters they need to get this shit together.

> If you want the press to be taken seriously on serious matters they need to get this shit together.

That's certainly true for the educated readers/people.

It's a sad thing, but if you want to get real change, you're going to need the masses mobilized. Educated people already know about the current problems and a lot of them care and do want to take action - the thing is, we're a tiny minority.

In other words, the issue you are raising doesn't really need to be addressed, in the current situation - the more visibility for the main problem at stake, the better. Unless you work for the NSA, Google, Microsoft/Skype, Paltalk, AOL, and a ton of defense contractors etc., that is.

Re: Google ‘pressure cooker,’ get a police visit? Maybe not.

#12

Post by MrKurtz »

dendory wrote: post #9

I don't see how this is busting her story much. The FBI confirmed that cops went to her house, just not FBI agents, but local ones. Still, if the FBI knew, then clearly it was a joint operation in some way. Then, the WP says that the reason they went could be something other than Google searches, and instead something that they posted on Facebook or a jumpy neighbor (although that's doubtful because they never actual…

There is a huge difference! if they visited her because of her web searches which are private then it's a big deal, if on the other hand the visit was due to her profile picture which is public then it's not as big of a deal.

Re: Google ‘pressure cooker,’ get a police visit? Maybe not.

#13

Post by magicalist »

dendory wrote: post #9

I don't see how this is busting her story much. The FBI confirmed that cops went to her house, just not FBI agents, but local ones. Still, if the FBI knew, then clearly it was a joint operation in some way. Then, the WP says that the reason they went could be something other than Google searches, and instead something that they posted on Facebook or a jumpy neighbor (although that's doubtful because they never actual…

Yes, the difference between "posted on facebook" and "did research online" is an extremely important distinction to make. One is meant to be seen by others (the exact grouping defined by the privacy setting), the other is not.

Re: Google ‘pressure cooker,’ get a police visit? Maybe not.

#15

Post by trekky1700 »

dendory wrote: post #9

I don't see how this is busting her story much. The FBI confirmed that cops went to her house, just not FBI agents, but local ones. Still, if the FBI knew, then clearly it was a joint operation in some way. Then, the WP says that the reason they went could be something other than Google searches, and instead something that they posted on Facebook or a jumpy neighbor (although that's doubtful because they never actual…

The FBI could have easily called and asked local police, since they were getting the heat for it. THe local police would be much more willing to talk to the FBI than reporters, and the FBI wouldn't have to go through PR officers...

Re: Google ‘pressure cooker,’ get a police visit? Maybe not.

#16

Post by mcphilip »

MrKurtz wrote: post #10
mladenkovacevic wrote: post #7

Maybe not and maybe yes?? What a stupid title. There is basically nothing the writer cites to absolutely negate the claim that a Google search possibly resulted in a visit from the police? She searched for pressure cookers, and police came to her house asking her, among other things, whether they own pressure cookers and if they know how to make a bomb out of pressure cookers. Those are the facts.

Nor have there been reports to support her claim. As to the police visit, there are plenty of other speculative reasons for it: https://plus.google.com/112961607570158342254/posts/FWAVRVaN...

I suspect the author incorrectly inferred that the visit was directly related to the family's google search history. Still, it'd be very unsettling if the post of a picture of firecrackers was a factor in the decision to send a squad out for questioning.

Am I the only one who grew up with M-XX fireworks and loved using them for a couple weeks a year? Exploding mushrooms and dropping them down crawdad holes was the extent of my nefarious behavior...

Here's a good video of one of the fun ways to use M-66 firecrackers:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2xibj58ADk

Re: Google ‘pressure cooker,’ get a police visit? Maybe not.

#17

Post by jlgreco »

moocowduckquack wrote: post #5

Is interesting that the FBI have said there was a police visit from specific departments, although those police departments themselves are dancing round the issue. I wonder if the police misrepresented themselves. “They were officers from the Nassau County Police Department who identified themselves as such,” said Kelly Langmesser, the FBI spokeswoman. But mysteriously, neither the Nassau nor Suffolk County Police wo…

The FBI, for all their faults, are professionals. Local police? Ha!

Re: Google ‘pressure cooker,’ get a police visit? Maybe not.

#18

Post by mladenkovacevic »

MrKurtz wrote: post #10
mladenkovacevic wrote: post #7

Maybe not and maybe yes?? What a stupid title. There is basically nothing the writer cites to absolutely negate the claim that a Google search possibly resulted in a visit from the police? She searched for pressure cookers, and police came to her house asking her, among other things, whether they own pressure cookers and if they know how to make a bomb out of pressure cookers. Those are the facts.

Nor have there been reports to support her claim. As to the police visit, there are plenty of other speculative reasons for it: https://plus.google.com/112961607570158342254/posts/FWAVRVaN...

No .. just stop it.

What a strange tactic to try and bring truth to a truly peculiar story by introducing another completely uninformed person's ramblings and insinuations.

Here are two facts:

1) She searched for pressure cookers

2) The police officer asked her if her and her husband own a pressure cooker and/or knew how to make a bomb with it

Trying to start a conversation around a picture of fireworks she had on her Facebook account posted on Independence day contributes EXACTLY ZERO to settling the 2 disturbing facts we are trying to consolidate.

Re: Google ‘pressure cooker,’ get a police visit? Maybe not.

#19

Post by thezilch »

MrKurtz wrote: post #12
dendory wrote: post #9

I don't see how this is busting her story much. The FBI confirmed that cops went to her house, just not FBI agents, but local ones. Still, if the FBI knew, then clearly it was a joint operation in some way. Then, the WP says that the reason they went could be something other than Google searches, and instead something that they posted on Facebook or a jumpy neighbor (although that's doubtful because they never actual…

There is a huge difference! if they visited her because of her web searches which are private then it's a big deal, if on the other hand the visit was due to her profile picture which is public then it's not as big of a deal.

What's private about a web search, exactly? For unauthenticated sessions, Google does not use HTTPS by default. If I click through to a SERP link, my search referrer is passed to that party. They can do what they want with it, including alerting authorities. Not that authorities need alerting or warrant to capture all non-secure traffic.

I'm not convinced we know any of the reasons for the visit yet, but it's fairly disingenuous to consider ANYTHING done on an online property, that you don't own, is not public.

Re: Google ‘pressure cooker,’ get a police visit? Maybe not.

#20

Post by freehunter »

joshdance wrote: post #14

Another data point in this story. https://plus.google.com/112961607570158342254/posts/FWAVRVaN...

How is that a data point? It's unfounded blabbering from someone who knows nothing about the situation and has no more facts or information than the WP article does. Declan even admits he hasn't investigated this case.
Post reply on HN