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

Google+ invite lands man in jail

fastcompany.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 203 posts

Re: Google+ invite lands man in jail

#141

Post by rmc »

parennoob wrote: post #75
tluyben2 wrote: post #10

I watch American tv shows and movies and am well aware of restraining orders but thought it was something very rare and almost never happens; now I read this. Is it that normal to get one 'after a breakup'? I have never heard anything like that in my country except for hardcore, life threatening criminal situations. Is it that easy to get one there and you actually get rounded up and hauled to a cell for violating wh…

It is kind of telling that people seem to have become inured enough to the extremely anti-male nature of such laws in the US that they are seriously discussing whether or not sending a man to jail over sending a Google+ invite to a woman is okay or not, saying "it depends upon the circumstances" and whatnot. Are you kidding me? Seriously, seeing "You got a Google+ invite from X" can cause you so much mental harm that…

The courts told him "no contact". This wasn't some frivilous law suit of "emotional harm", this was a judge saying "If you do this, you'll go to jail", and the person did the thing.

Re: Google+ invite lands man in jail

#142

Post by tluyben2 »

skrebbel wrote: post #69
tluyben2 wrote: post #10

I watch American tv shows and movies and am well aware of restraining orders but thought it was something very rare and almost never happens; now I read this. Is it that normal to get one 'after a breakup'? I have never heard anything like that in my country except for hardcore, life threatening criminal situations. Is it that easy to get one there and you actually get rounded up and hauled to a cell for violating wh…

My thoughts exactly! I don't even know what "restraining order" is in my language.

We share that language; I didn't know the word, but it seems to be omgangs/contact verbod. And no, I rarely hear them being used; there was one for some Amsterdam gangster and the partner who betrayed him, but that makes sense.

Re: Google+ invite lands man in jail

#143

Post by knorby »

DanBC wrote: post #102
xtirpation wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right of course, but I struggle to view the world in such a black-and-white manner to be honest especially when there are black boxes like in play, Google+'s source code in this case. How much proof would have to be provided that the Google+ invitation was sent deliberately by the user? Sworn testimony from a Google employee? There can of course exist bugs that send invites erroneously that nobody knows about.…

When someone has taken a restraining order out you've lost your rights to shades of grey. The order is designed to be black and white to provide clear, firm, boundaries over which you will not pass. Before the restraining order there are several levels of allowance which let people obey the spirit (no contact) or to experiment with boundaries. When under a restraining order you need to take special steps to ensure co…

What if it was a spam email from a bot impersonating Google+? I occasionally scan my spam, and it doesn't seem out of the question. Once printed out, would you be sure that all judge/prosecutors would notice or want to notice? Restraining orders don't come out of the blue, but there is plenty of reason to avoid sending someone to jail because a no-content email contained their name.

Re: Google+ invite lands man in jail

#144

Post by aestra »

einhverfr wrote: post #63
rmc wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well if the person is threatening your life, then it makes sense that you might break up with them...

But if the person is threatening your life, it makes no sense to get a restraining order. "Yes, I know you want to kill me, so don't contact me, don't come near my home at such and such address, or my work at such and such address, or you will be guilty of a minor misdemeanor!" Right.... that's a good idea...

If you are served a restraining order, you almost always already know these locations. If you don't know these locations, there is almost no reason to serve a restraining order.

Some of the people replying here clearly have no experience with stalking or domestic violence... They are much more scary than you can imagine.

Re: Google+ invite lands man in jail

#145

Post by aestra »

einhverfr wrote: post #118
hyperpape wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's true that it isn't nearly as effective as you'd hope but it does help enhance your ability to get the police quickly involved, establish a paper trail, etc.

None of that matters if you are dead. If someone is out to kill you, go hide with relatives, some ways not too close. Don't serve them with a restraining order.

>If someone is out to kill you, go hide with relatives, some ways not too close.

Define not too close. My closest relatives are over 200 miles away. Am I expected to quit my job? Take my children (If I had them) out of school? For how long?

This person may know exactly who all your relatives are and where they live, thus know exactly where to find you anyways.

Re: Google+ invite lands man in jail

#146

Post by chilldream »

akmiller wrote: post #107
rayiner wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually know jack-shit about Google+. I assumed what the article was talking about was like a Facebook friend request where you have to individually invite a specific person. Will Google+ really just randomly spam people you've had e-mail conversations with?

I don't think they randomly spam, but sometimes when you login to Google+ it will show you a large window of all your google contacts that are not in your circles with an easy way to invite all of them. It's easy to accidentally click the button to send invites just to close the window and it's also easy to not realize who all you sent them to.

Yes, and even worse, there's no "Don't ask me again" button, which is actually enough to singlehandedly keep me from ever using G+ voluntarily.

Re: Google+ invite lands man in jail

#147

Post by vezzy-fnord »

parennoob wrote: post #75
tluyben2 wrote: post #10

I watch American tv shows and movies and am well aware of restraining orders but thought it was something very rare and almost never happens; now I read this. Is it that normal to get one 'after a breakup'? I have never heard anything like that in my country except for hardcore, life threatening criminal situations. Is it that easy to get one there and you actually get rounded up and hauled to a cell for violating wh…

It is kind of telling that people seem to have become inured enough to the extremely anti-male nature of such laws in the US that they are seriously discussing whether or not sending a man to jail over sending a Google+ invite to a woman is okay or not, saying "it depends upon the circumstances" and whatnot. Are you kidding me? Seriously, seeing "You got a Google+ invite from X" can cause you so much mental harm that…

Thank you. I'm also appalled by the complete lack of empathy and the bitter pragmatism here.

If you're going to participate in social media, there's certain rules of etiquette and responsibilities to follow (not like anyone does, but anyway). Large companies will resort to malicious and unethical features in order to gain advantages. Fact of life. You would think our interconnected society would be aware of this, but I guess it's beyond the average consumer of social media.

Re: Google+ invite lands man in jail

#148

Post by mcv »

atmosx wrote: post #85

Do we know if Google+ invites are sent deliberately? I think on Facebook you can prove who sent a friend request. That said, being arrested for a friend-request is silly. She could just block/ban/reject the request and no harm done. I would like to know the name of judge or prosecutor(?) who accepted a Google+ friend request as breach of restraining order . I get the very strong feeling that judges/prosecutors and la…

> That said, being arrested for a friend-request is silly. She could just block/ban/reject the request and no harm done.

There's no such thing as a "friend request" in G+. You can follow someone, which means you get to see their public posts. The other person will get a notification of that, but won't see anything you post.

Of course the other person can decide to follow you, and then you get to also see their non-public posts that they share with a circle you're in. And of course they get to see your posts (public and appropriate circles).

But even if people don't follow you, G+ can still suggest that you might want to follow them. And this being Google, that could probably be based on the fact that you emailed each other a lot 2 years ago.

So the big question here is: was it a notification that the restrainee followed the restrainer? Or was it Google inadvertently suggesting that the restrainer might want to follow the restrainee?

Re: Google+ invite lands man in jail

#149

Post by hyperpape »

aestra wrote: post #145
einhverfr wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of that matters if you are dead. If someone is out to kill you, go hide with relatives, some ways not too close. Don't serve them with a restraining order.

>If someone is out to kill you, go hide with relatives, some ways not too close. Define not too close. My closest relatives are over 200 miles away. Am I expected to quit my job? Take my children (If I had them) out of school? For how long? This person may know exactly who all your relatives are and where they live, thus know exactly where to find you anyways.

I think the real answer is "don't take advice from HN". I know someone who moved halfway across the country to avoid domestic violence. Sometimes it is an answer. It shouldn't ever need to be, but in reality, it's sometimes the only option a woman has available.

Re: Google+ invite lands man in jail

#150

Post by aestra »

king_jester wrote: post #86
pervycreeper wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(IANAL) Restraining orders are usually granted without requiring any evidence, aside from the testimony of the person requesting it. I believe it is a common strategy for (especially) women to exploit this in order to gain some sort of advantage over their partners following a breakup.

> I believe it is a common strategy for (especially) women to exploit this in order to gain some sort of advantage over their partners following a breakup. Perhaps the reason why women seek TROs and ROs is because they are much more likely then men to be the victim of physical assault, stalking, harassment, or murder from their partners or former partners.

Men seek restraining orders, as well, women at a slightly higher rate...

http://www.sp2.upenn.edu/ortner/docs/sorenson_doc2.pdf

Each year, more than one million people in the United States obtain restraining orders for intimate partner rape, physical assault, or stalking (Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000). An estimated 18.9% of the more than 5 million U.S. women and 4.3% of the more than 3 million U.S. men who are physically abused, raped, or stalked by an intimate partner each year seek and are granted a restraining order.

Post reply on HN