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

Feds order Google to track people searching certain names or details

dailymail.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 337 posts

Re: Feds order Google to track people searching certain names or details

#291

Post by raxxorrax »

toto444 wrote: post #288

Last time I was translating Final Fantasy 7 dialogues into easy Japanese using Google Translate. At some point it occured to me that using Google Translate to translate 'bombing mission' was very dumb. I made sure to add 'Final Fantasy 7' and 'Mako reactor' to my translations...

This is an example of the chilling effects if when think you are watched.

Of course it is not stupid to search for 'bombing mission' as there are thousands of benign contexts to do so. It is a crime to put people under suspicion like that.

It is wrong that you need to justify yourself before authorities. It is the other way around actually. In democracies at least.

Re: Feds order Google to track people searching certain names or details

#292

Post by altacc »

Maximus9000 wrote: post #95

Is there a better source on this? Daily Mail is terrible: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-mail/

I was quite surprised it was covered in the Daily Mail as they are usually in favour of trampling on privacy & civil liberties in the name of law & order. They're classic "nothing to fear if you've done nothing wrong" types, especially when the aim is to catch terrorists.

Re: Feds order Google to track people searching certain names or details

#293

Post by no_time »

toto444 wrote: post #288

Last time I was translating Final Fantasy 7 dialogues into easy Japanese using Google Translate. At some point it occured to me that using Google Translate to translate 'bombing mission' was very dumb. I made sure to add 'Final Fantasy 7' and 'Mako reactor' to my translations...

Reminds me of this site posted here a few months ago.

https://www.socialcooling.com/

Re: Feds order Google to track people searching certain names or details

#294

Post by BobbyJo »

gnopgnip wrote: post #276
BobbyJo wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think something everyone should be aware of as well: there is no legal requirement that Google not hand over this data to police. A warrant is needed to force Google to hand over such data, but they don't need anything at all to ask Google nicely . And if Google decides it's in their best interest to comply without a warrant, they are the legal owner of the data, so ...

> there is no legal requirement that Google not hand over this data to police. This isn't really true. The Electronic Communications Privacy Act prohibits third parties from sharing electronic communications without a warrant. It doesn't matter if they are the legal owner of the data, if it is about a third party that has fourth amendment protections.

IANAL, but the way I understood ECPA it only really protects communication while in transit, and both stored communications and data disclosed to third parties isn't really protected, depending on the context.

Search history, and Google's analytics about you, are a gray area, because you are communicating with Google, not using Google as a transport layer with an expectation of privacy.

Like, if the FBI asked me for my text messages with person X, I can hand them over if I want since they are my communications, but if they want the texts from my phone company they are legally protected. Using search is like texting Google.

Re: Feds order Google to track people searching certain names or details

#295

Post by csomar »

ineedasername wrote: post #262
willis936 wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to point out that "technocracy" means society gives decision-making power to the experts.

Yes-- I think "technologically-enabled fascism" is probably more accurate for that sentiment.

corporatic-fascism.

Re: Feds order Google to track people searching certain names or details

#297

Post by mulmen »

ineedasername wrote: post #258
mulmen wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rehabilitation is clearly not a high priority in the US Justice system. See: outcomes. It's a vengeance based system.

vengeance Unfortunately. But the criminal still can't commit crimes while in prison though. Vengeance just also means that solving the problem of any individual criminal is usually only temporary.

Well there can still be rehabilitation with captivity. The US system just doesn’t prioritize that. We prefer punishment, even though outcomes are worse for everyone.

Re: Feds order Google to track people searching certain names or details

#298

Post by mulmen »

elzbardico wrote: post #234
mulmen wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rehabilitation is clearly not a high priority in the US Justice system. See: outcomes. It's a vengeance based system.

inmates have found that is pretty hard to commit the same crimes that put them in jail while they are behind the bars. It should count for anything.

Until they get out, have no life skills and no prospects because they have been excluded from society then re-offend and the cycle continues.

Re: Feds order Google to track people searching certain names or details

#299

Post by hadlock »

I remember downloading anarchists_cookbook.zip off of an AOL BBS in ~1995 at the ripe old age of Late Elementary/Middle School. Trying to imagine how my life would have worked out after being wrung through the Future Crimes division of juvenile detention.

Re: Feds order Google to track people searching certain names or details

#300

Post by qwerty456127 »

So, anybody curious about bombs and explosions gets on the list at the FBI? I searched that on a number of occasions. Mostly when I was younger and had more spare time. Out of pure curiosity and intention to know everything, also be prepared for postapocalypse (which I, unlike crazy prepper guys, don't consider highly probable yet don't consider impossible either). Never ever meant to use such knowledge during peace time and hoped to never need to use that ever. Just curious. And I believe there are many such curious people and curiosity is not a crime.
Post reply on HN