11–20 of 47 posts
I'm not sure what the cops think this person did but whatever she was accused of this is an absolutely unacceptable way to handle it in the US.
If you asked me this is exactly how I would assume this sort of thing is handled in the US
I don’t understand the political motivation here. Let’s say theres actually something to hide. This very public action is certain to have the opposite affect and bring even more attention to Rebekah and her data (Streisand effect).
Context: "The Florida department of law enforcement confirmed they had entered Jones’s house on a search warrant. But in a statement the department said the action was related to a recent computer hack of the health department website, in which emergency response coordinators were sent an unauthorised message." ... "[Jones] told CNN she had come to the conclusion that the raid had been motivated by a desire to root o…
Why? This information should be stored, encrypted, and be almost impossible to decrypt. You need a dead mans switch (which is tried and tested) to destroy any and all data. In fact, you could have a system where if you don't visit a URL within a few hours, it destroys a part of the method to access the decryption mechanism (or something similar to this, which works in "real time" and acts a nuke. If you're in jail for 24+ hours you have the safety to know your system will work and destroy password.txt/keyfile on a server somewhere and make it harder to access your records).
Storing this data in plain text, on a partition that can be decrypted within seconds is negligent and both parties are at fault. You need to ensure both systems meet strict requirements before you start communicating in any medium (digital, face to face etc)
Snowden knew what was going to happen to him, so he had the good sense to somewhat plan ahead. These people are not your friends, and you should assume as much.
You make the wrong person angry and you will end up in a ditch somewhere. Make preparations, retain a lawyer and for gods sake practice good sec ops; if you have privileged information it's vital you make it as hard as possible for both you and the state to access it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes American cops don't miss an opportunity to amaze the world... (and make people believe that USA is the less secure place in the world to behave like this).
American gun culture has little to do with this case. Cops behave like this because behind door number one there could be a guy with an assault rifle ready to take them down. In 99% of the cases there isn't, but if you do 100 of these raids without taking risks, it becomes more likely than not that your own children will become orphans. It's hypocritical to attack the cops that (literally) fight to stay alive without…
> American gun culture has little to do with this case.
non sequitur.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes American cops don't miss an opportunity to amaze the world... (and make people believe that USA is the less secure place in the world to behave like this).
American gun culture has little to do with this case. Cops behave like this because behind door number one there could be a guy with an assault rifle ready to take them down. In 99% of the cases there isn't, but if you do 100 of these raids without taking risks, it becomes more likely than not that your own children will become orphans. It's hypocritical to attack the cops that (literally) fight to stay alive without…
The cops were sent to the house of a middle-aged scientist who was reporting on COVID data. The idea that you need to charge in with guns is far beyond ludicrous.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes American cops don't miss an opportunity to amaze the world... (and make people believe that USA is the less secure place in the world to behave like this).
American gun culture has little to do with this case. Cops behave like this because behind door number one there could be a guy with an assault rifle ready to take them down. In 99% of the cases there isn't, but if you do 100 of these raids without taking risks, it becomes more likely than not that your own children will become orphans. It's hypocritical to attack the cops that (literally) fight to stay alive without…
i'm struggling to understand this -- are you saying there is no link between 'American gun culture' and the probability of 'there could be a guy with an assault rifle ready to take them down'? in what other 1st world country would the said probability be even close?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes American cops don't miss an opportunity to amaze the world... (and make people believe that USA is the less secure place in the world to behave like this).
American gun culture has little to do with this case. Cops behave like this because behind door number one there could be a guy with an assault rifle ready to take them down. In 99% of the cases there isn't, but if you do 100 of these raids without taking risks, it becomes more likely than not that your own children will become orphans. It's hypocritical to attack the cops that (literally) fight to stay alive without…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes American cops don't miss an opportunity to amaze the world... (and make people believe that USA is the less secure place in the world to behave like this).
American gun culture has little to do with this case. Cops behave like this because behind door number one there could be a guy with an assault rifle ready to take them down. In 99% of the cases there isn't, but if you do 100 of these raids without taking risks, it becomes more likely than not that your own children will become orphans. It's hypocritical to attack the cops that (literally) fight to stay alive without…