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

91–100 of 337 posts

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

#91

Post by gowld »

iammisc wrote: post #62
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

Can you link to info about that?

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

#92

Post by gowld »

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…

Your first paragraph contradicts the next two paragraphs.

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

#93

Post by UIUC_06 »

gowld wrote: post #92
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…

Your first paragraph contradicts the next two paragraphs.

Would you care to explain that?

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

#94

Post by toolz »

tyre wrote: post #77
toolz wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Spend even just a couple hours researching dark pools and naked shorts and it becomes blindingly obvious the SEC exists to do anything but protect consumers.

The twitter outrage over elon's comments are nothing more than a woefully uninformed public hoping to remove the tip without addressing the iceburg underneath.

If every one of your competition doesn't have to play by the rules, you'll find it hard to beat them playing honestly and you'll find that over time the only winners left are the cheaters.

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

#96

Post by gnurqdio »

_fat_santa wrote: post #4
literallyaduck wrote: post #2

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

Federal agents raided the home of John Doe this morning, accused of searching for terms such a “PipeBombJS” and “IED components for React”. The suspect was making pour over coffee when he was apprehended.

Real case: the default installer for GNUradio is called "pybombs". Last time I searched for it, google tried to auto-correct to one of those bad terms:

https://github.com/gnuradio/pybombs

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

#98

Post by AlbertCory »

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.

If Sundar decided to fight this (I'm not saying he would), then Google would probably file for an injunction to quash the request. No arrests, no raids.

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

#99

Post by themitigating »

iammisc wrote: post #62
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

Can you provide a source?
Post reply on HN