"I got absolutely no work done."
That's the tactics they use (don't ask how I know that). Be strong and welcome to Germany!
FBI Harassing Core Tor Developer, Demand Meeting, but Refusing to Explain Why
11–20 of 129 posts
Re: FBI Harassing Core Tor Developer, Demand Meeting, but Refusing to Explain Why
#12The original story told about a couple of polite phonecalls where they have requested to talk with her. How does it get described as "harassment"? Of course, she also added a lot of paranoid speculation to her original blog post, but there's not a single confirmation of her fears so far, not even a hint.
She has wisely communicated her desire to do so only with legal council present and they are clearly saying that they will circumvent this if they can.
Given the behavior of bad apple cops and agents, she is right to feel threatened. If these are agents with good intentions, they have no reason to be afraid of a lawyer. If they are going to circumvent her legal protections, harassment is the minimum best outcome for her.
Re: FBI Harassing Core Tor Developer, Demand Meeting, but Refusing to Explain Why
#13Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only that this is not a sexual setting and the fact it is a "she" changes nothing in this context.
The point still stands. If a person tells you to stop an action they find uncomfortable for whatever reason in any way, no matter their gender, race, etc. It becomes harassment. The FBI is a government organization that you could argue has the job of doing this, however they fail to ever state why they require her assistance (and they seem kinda rude to me).
> *If a person tells you to stop an action they find uncomfortable for whatever reason in any way ... it becomes harassment."
I don't want to get too far off topic, but this is blatantly false, especially as far as law enforcement is concerned.
Re: FBI Harassing Core Tor Developer, Demand Meeting, but Refusing to Explain Why
#14Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only that this is not a sexual setting and the fact it is a "she" changes nothing in this context.
The point still stands. If a person tells you to stop an action they find uncomfortable for whatever reason in any way, no matter their gender, race, etc. It becomes harassment. The FBI is a government organization that you could argue has the job of doing this, however they fail to ever state why they require her assistance (and they seem kinda rude to me).
What? How over sensitive are people getting these days? Did you grow up on tumblr?
Next you'll be saying she was "almost raped".
Re: FBI Harassing Core Tor Developer, Demand Meeting, but Refusing to Explain Why
#15It sounds like her concern is that they might show her a magic piece of paper which, once you've seen it, requires you to do certain things and prohibits you from ever talking about it to anyone.[1] Magic pieces of paper like that really shouldn't be a part of our legal system. [1] https://epic.org/privacy/nsl/
They can email those to you.
if emailed, what prevents you from leaking it (along with other recent content of your email inbox) claiming somebody hacked your email ?
Re: FBI Harassing Core Tor Developer, Demand Meeting, but Refusing to Explain Why
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The original story told about a couple of polite phonecalls where they have requested to talk with her. How does it get described as "harassment"? As soon as they continued after the very first 'no' it becomes harassment. Imagine this was a work setting, the FBI was a coworker of this individual, and they asked for a date. After the very first "no, please don't bring it up again" it becomes harassment.
Only that this is not a sexual setting and the fact it is a "she" changes nothing in this context.
I never used that word. I called it harassment, which can come in different varieties.
Upon reviewing my previous response, I don't even see where I made mention of gender even to the extent of a pronoun.
Re: FBI Harassing Core Tor Developer, Demand Meeting, but Refusing to Explain Why
#17It sounds like her concern is that they might show her a magic piece of paper which, once you've seen it, requires you to do certain things and prohibits you from ever talking about it to anyone.[1] Magic pieces of paper like that really shouldn't be a part of our legal system. [1] https://epic.org/privacy/nsl/
She does (still) have a canary:
Re: FBI Harassing Core Tor Developer, Demand Meeting, but Refusing to Explain Why
#18Could they be trying to serve her?
If they were, they wouldn't make a phone call first. They would just do it.
Re: FBI Harassing Core Tor Developer, Demand Meeting, but Refusing to Explain Why
#19It sounds like her concern is that they might show her a magic piece of paper which, once you've seen it, requires you to do certain things and prohibits you from ever talking about it to anyone.[1] Magic pieces of paper like that really shouldn't be a part of our legal system. [1] https://epic.org/privacy/nsl/
They would just serve the paper using the usual techniques for delivering legal papers to persons possibly unwilling to receive them. These techniques usually avoid identifying yourself upfront.
I believe they rather want information which they cannot legally force her to divulge (otherwise see above), so they're trying their luck at intimidation.
Re: FBI Harassing Core Tor Developer, Demand Meeting, but Refusing to Explain Why
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point still stands. If a person tells you to stop an action they find uncomfortable for whatever reason in any way, no matter their gender, race, etc. It becomes harassment. The FBI is a government organization that you could argue has the job of doing this, however they fail to ever state why they require her assistance (and they seem kinda rude to me).
> *If a person tells you to stop an action they find uncomfortable for whatever reason in any way ... it becomes harassment." I don't want to get too far off topic, but this is blatantly false, especially as far as law enforcement is concerned.
Disagree.
Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77 (1973) the Fifth Amendment “not only protects the individual against being involuntarily called as a witness against himself in a criminal prosecution, but also privileges him not to answer official questions put to him in any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings