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

61–70 of 337 posts

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

#61

Post by J5892 »

hyproxia wrote: post #30
colbyhub wrote: post #24

I made the switch from DDG to Startpage.com the day when Bing/DDG censored "tank man" results on the anniversary of Tiananmen Square, haven't looked back. I do miss the !bangs, so I have a browser shortcut to access those when I need them.

You're talking about the "tank man" that was safely escorted out of the scene without getting harmed? What about him? https://youtu.be/qq8zFLIftGk

The point is that the photo was censored by a significant US search engine.

Also, let's not ignore that the CCP murdered somewhere between 300 and 10,000 Chinese citizens the day before he stood in front of the tank.

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

#62

Post by iammisc »

AlbertCory wrote: post #60

I'm not a Constitutional scholar, but I would bet SCOTUS rules this kind of warrant illegal. Google certainly has the resources to take the case that far. AFAIK a warrant usually is tied to a specific person or a specific crime. In other words, if an explosion killed Harry McHarryface, then it would be constitutional to ask for names of people who searched for Harry. Or if the fertilizer used in the bomb was shown to…

Does the current administration follow SCOTUS rulings?

Edit: why am I being downvotes? The president explicitly stated his plan to ignore another SCOTUS ruling

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

#63

Post by mindslight »

xxpor wrote: post #43
mindslight wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government and Google are symbiotic entities. Why would this ever happen?

Not even close. This sort of rhetoric just numbs people to actual abuses when they happen. If you want to see actual symbiotic entities, go look at social media in China or American defense contractors.

Without backing up your assertion, we're just talking past one another. Google the entity relies upon USG's system of laws for what it can and cannot do. Without Google (et al), USG would have a much harder time gathering information on citizens. That's symbiosis.

There is real downside to Google if it decided to go against USG's de facto interests, even if it technically has the de jure ability to do so. What is the upside? The only large company that has made an attempt to rebuke the general desires of USG is Apple, which has since backpedaled with its on device spyware.

Could this relationship be reformed through the little bit of leverage that US citizens have over USG? Perhaps. If you've got another concrete proposal aimed at doing do, then bring it up. But unless we're discussing a specific proposal, it's prudent for individual citizens to model the two as cooperating attackers rather than getting distracted with hopeful dichotomies such as "government" vs "private company".

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

#64

Post by iammisc »

xxpor wrote: post #43
mindslight wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government and Google are symbiotic entities. Why would this ever happen?

Not even close. This sort of rhetoric just numbs people to actual abuses when they happen. If you want to see actual symbiotic entities, go look at social media in China or American defense contractors.

Honestly this forced choice (either google is in bed with government or Raytheon et Al are) is just needless politicization.

Why don't we just condemn both? I mean... Google is going down the same path as the defense contractors and instead of stopping it from evolving into something like them, you're essentially arguing to look the other way

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

#66

Post by bellyfullofbac »

hwers wrote: post #39
literallyaduck wrote: post #2

The only sensible solution is to name JS and CSS frameworks using the keyword list.

This is a wonderful civil disobedience type idea. If our industry had any guts we'd actually do this.

It would have to be popular for the keyword poisoning to work, but it probably won't get popular with a weird name..

"Yeah in my last project I developed a web app based on BinLaden Framework and IsisDB"..

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

#67

Post by lostlogin »

JaimeThompson wrote: post #47
emayljames wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only people killed where unarmed soldiers, that where burned alive by protesters.

That appears to be a someone counterfactual description of what happened. Supporting evidence would be of great help.

It’s just feeding the troll to reply to that account. “Taiwan is China” etc in comment history.

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

#68

Post by toolz »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #34
Teknoman117 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just remember Qwest and Joseph Nacchio. It's entirely plausible he was crooked, but he also claimed the NSA backed out of a deal with Qwest and then the insider trading charges showed up after he refused to comply with their (illegal) requests to spy on their customers.

> It's entirely plausible he was crooked, but he also claimed the NSA backed out of a deal with Qwest and then the insider trading charges showed up after he refused to comply with their (illegal) requests to spy on their customers Read the charge sheet [1]. Is it possible that the NSA walked over to the SEC and asked them to prioritise this? Sure, why not. Is it also pretty clear cut that he insider traded? Yes. [1]…

It's difficult to win in an SEC governed market that is corrupt by design. You'd need a competitive advantage large enough to bridge the SECs designed corruption in the market.

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

#69

Post by shkkmo »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #34
Teknoman117 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just remember Qwest and Joseph Nacchio. It's entirely plausible he was crooked, but he also claimed the NSA backed out of a deal with Qwest and then the insider trading charges showed up after he refused to comply with their (illegal) requests to spy on their customers.

> It's entirely plausible he was crooked, but he also claimed the NSA backed out of a deal with Qwest and then the insider trading charges showed up after he refused to comply with their (illegal) requests to spy on their customers Read the charge sheet [1]. Is it possible that the NSA walked over to the SEC and asked them to prioritise this? Sure, why not. Is it also pretty clear cut that he insider traded? Yes. [1]…

I still see significant issues with using the threat of finicial repercussions and criminal charges to force dirty executives to comply with illegal efforts to spy on their customers.

This is problematic not just because of the violations of those customers' rights, but also because it creates perverse incentives for the government to encourage the success of dirty tech companies as means to circumvent constitutional protections.

Thus while I don't doubt Nacchio's guilt, I absolutely think that he should have atleast been allowed to use that argument as a defense in his court case so that the Government is somewhat discouraged from using such tactics by the knowledge that it can come to light in court.

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

#70

Post by freeflight »

colbyhub wrote: post #24

I made the switch from DDG to Startpage.com the day when Bing/DDG censored "tank man" results on the anniversary of Tiananmen Square, haven't looked back. I do miss the !bangs, so I have a browser shortcut to access those when I need them.

Startpage.com uses Google results, which besides having become kinda useless, have their own issue with censorship [0]

[0] https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/11/04/goog-n04.html

Post reply on HN