431–440 of 830 posts
He disrupted a career fair because it had defense contractors. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/oct/05/palest...
This story is the one that finally pushed me to leave google. I moved off my ~20 year old Google account and deleted everything off their services including almost a decade of Google photos. I cancelled my Google one subscription for extra space. I'm now self hosting what I can and paying proton mail for everything else. I refuse to allow a company that will hand over data at the request of an administrative warrant…
Apple and Microsoft are also subject to US laws. It's not like any company can get around this.
- iCloud Backup (including device and Messages backup)
- iCloud Drive
- Photos
- Notes
- Reminders
- Safari Bookmarks
- Siri Shortcuts
- Voice Memos
- Wallet passes
- Freeform
A reasonable approach might be to use an iPhone with a privacy respecting email provider.
The linked Google policy states: >We won’t give notice when legally prohibited under the terms of the request. The post states that his lawyer has reviewed the subpoena, but doesn't mention whether or not it contained a non-disclosure order. That's an important detail to address if the claim is that Google acted against its own policy.
According to the ACLU [1]: > This document explains two key ways that recipients can resist immigration administrative subpoenas: First, any gag order in these subpoenas has no legal effect; you are free to publicize them and inform the target of the subpoena. Second, you do not have to comply with the subpoena at all, unless ICE goes to court—where you can raise a number of possible objections—and the court orders c…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That would be true if We The People were reliably informed when we showed up to cast our votes. Weren't the democrats criticised for campaigning on the message that voting for Trump was a significant risk to due process and democracy? I feel like every voter was aware of what happened on Jan 6th and still voted for him with some level of knowledge about that.
I agree. People had already experienced one round of Trump before, and had every opportunity to see what he was planning for this term. There is no reasonable conclusion other than that they indeed wanted exactly what we got.
It worked because a lot of people bought that story (and many continue to buy it evidenced by DJT's approval ratings among the GOP voters). The whole campaign basically had no platform other than your cookie-cutter "migrant crime", "economy bad" ...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are there good hosted options that will not respond to non-judicial data requests? Someone is going to say self hosted is better and I don't disagree, but there's limits to how much time I can spend on self hosted stuff.
Protonmail iirc. You can even get documents and photos synced. Not sure how well it works for photos.
Protonmail also has gone on record stating that they will comply with legal orders from the Swiss government to spy on and turn over the private data of their users.
https://proton.me/blog/climate-activist-arrest
Swiss law has recently gotten significantly more aggressive in recent years, especially wrt to prosecuting climate activists. Criminal damages for drawing with chalk on pavement, for example...
Look up the "Secret Files Scandal" of 1989 and decide for yourself how comfortable you are with Swiss law.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree. People had already experienced one round of Trump before, and had every opportunity to see what he was planning for this term. There is no reasonable conclusion other than that they indeed wanted exactly what we got.
The US has very low voter turnout. Winning is mainly getting your voters to turn up, but usually apathy wins. Of course the media plays a huge part in this, but voter suppression is the US is fine art. Personally I feel that non voters effectively voted for Trump, and they should own that as much as die hard MAGA types.
Don't disagree with you in principle but 2024 saw a very, very, very large turnout for US standards - the biggest one... Kamala's 75m+ votes basically are good enough (by very wide margin) to win any previous election (slimmer margin in 2020 than others but you get my point...)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
EFF's letter offers more details and says that the subpoena did not contain a gag order: https://www.eff.org/files/2026/04/13/eff_letter_re_google_no...
Well it did contain a request to not notify according to that same letter. I suppose that brings up several questions. 1. Does that mean the same thing in the ToS? 2. How valid are these requests?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
According to the ACLU [1]: > This document explains two key ways that recipients can resist immigration administrative subpoenas: First, any gag order in these subpoenas has no legal effect; you are free to publicize them and inform the target of the subpoena. Second, you do not have to comply with the subpoena at all, unless ICE goes to court—where you can raise a number of possible objections—and the court orders c…
Is the ACLU offering to pay your legal bills or participate in your defense along with that legal advice that they're offering?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Migrating is such a good feeling. You don't have to do it all at once, either: I migrated to fastmail over the course of several years. Each time google did something that got my blood pressure up I went into my password manager and migrated another account. In aggregate it was a hassle, but these days I almost miss the feeling of being able to do something in response to stinky actions from google.
I don't think fastmail is going to help you. They are subject to legal requirements too and probably American jurisdiction also despite what their particular position is. https://www.fastmail.com/blog/fastmails-servers-are-in-the-u... . People love to hate Google but they're just doing what any corporation subject to law is going to do.
The linked Google policy states: >We won’t give notice when legally prohibited under the terms of the request. The post states that his lawyer has reviewed the subpoena, but doesn't mention whether or not it contained a non-disclosure order. That's an important detail to address if the claim is that Google acted against its own policy.
According to the ACLU [1]: > This document explains two key ways that recipients can resist immigration administrative subpoenas: First, any gag order in these subpoenas has no legal effect; you are free to publicize them and inform the target of the subpoena. Second, you do not have to comply with the subpoena at all, unless ICE goes to court—where you can raise a number of possible objections—and the court orders c…