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

71–80 of 337 posts

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

#71

Post by falcolas »

J5892 wrote: post #56
emayljames wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Even the official CCP numbers disagree with you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Tiananmen_Square_protests... > On June 19, Beijing Party Secretary Li Ximing reported to the Politburo that the government's confirmed death toll was 241, including 218 civilians (of which 36 were students), 10 PLA soldiers, and 13 People's Armed Police, along with 7,000 wounded. But the actual number of deaths is likely much higher.

Sounds like those numbers have been “fixed” as the narrative has evolved over the intervening years.

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

#72

Post by JumpCrisscross »

shkkmo wrote: post #69
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> 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

I do too. We just have no evidence this happened.

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

#73

Post by hwers »

bellyfullofbac wrote: post #66
hwers wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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"..

I'm sure we can figure out something cleverer. Maybe use one of the more obscure names or a tagged phone number in some clever way.

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

#74

Post by J5892 »

falcolas wrote: post #71
J5892 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even the official CCP numbers disagree with you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Tiananmen_Square_protests... > On June 19, Beijing Party Secretary Li Ximing reported to the Politburo that the government's confirmed death toll was 241, including 218 civilians (of which 36 were students), 10 PLA soldiers, and 13 People's Armed Police, along with 7,000 wounded. But the actual number of deaths is likely much higher.

Sounds like those numbers have been “fixed” as the narrative has evolved over the intervening years.

I'm not up to date with the current official narrative, but I can only assume it's that there was a large picnic that day and someone accidentally spilled a giant jar of raspberry jam.

But it was an otherwise pleasant day with exactly zero humans crushed by tanks or otherwise killed.

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

#75

Post by JumpCrisscross »

mindslight wrote: post #63
xxpor wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Google the entity relies upon USG's system of laws for what it can and cannot do

You've defined symbiosis in a way that incorporates every person, company--and hell protected species--that touches American law. That makes the term useless for purposes of discussion.

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

#76

Post by elwell »

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.

Too privacy-conscious for DuckDuckGo? That's next level trend setting.

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

#77

Post by tyre »

toolz wrote: post #68
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

What does this even mean? That it’s difficult to make your stock go up because the SEC has rigged the market?

Read through Tesla’s history with the SEC, specifically Musk being immature and committing securities fraud on Twitter. They’ve fined him and the company, and there is no love lost between the two, but TSLA is still going up.

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

#79

Post by soperj »

dukeofdoom wrote: post #58
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.

“Show me the man and I'll show you the crime” was Beria's infamous boast. He served as deputy premier from 1941 until Stalin's death in 1953 ...

Ironic considering, soon after he was arrested, tried for treason and other offenses, sentenced to death, and executed on 23 December 1953.

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

#80

Post by hwers »

tehjoker wrote: post #42
tehwebguy wrote: post #23

Maybe the correct response to unconstitutional, secret warrants is to refuse to comply, maybe even refuse to respond? It's not clear to me what would happen next but I can't imagine Pichai would be arrested. Maybe a datacenter would be raided (could FBI even guess where this data might be physically located?) but at least then some public action would have to happen and break the secrecy.

I know a guy that was working for a defense contractor in the 2000s that searched his military ranked boss's name on Google and told me he was told the next day not to do that anymore.

I'm not disputing the idea that he was told this but that's a weird thing to be told just for googling someones name. Maybe he was just curious about his background and wanted to read his wikipedia page.
Post reply on HN