pull down to refresh
10 sats \ 3 replies \ @SimpleStacker 20h \ on: 3 Teens Almost Got Away With Murder. Then Police Found Their Google Searches tech
In this particular instance, I'm inclined to side with the judge. This isn't like targeting people who searched for generic terms like "Bitcoin" or "Trump", it targeted people who searched for a very specific residential address that happened to be the victim of a crime. It would be like bringing up the visitors logs at a hospital where a crime occurred.
If you're truly concerned about your internet privacy, just don't do anything from a computer that can be traced back to you.
tl;dr - I find myself satisfied to learn that these murderers are facing punishment.
I would prefer that Google willingly built a product for police to search, rather than give the police an authority to execute warrants.
In this particular instance
maybe you're reading about this particular instance in Wired, because that's how Mainstream Opinion Shaping Media works.
It would be like bringing up the visitors logs at a hospital where a crime occurred
yeah, the legal theory as I understand rests on this "register" theory.... that anything you do outside your own effects can't be considered to have an expectation of privacy, hence the 4th doesn't apply.
Okay, so if that's not your software, does the government have to obey the 4th amendment?
If you're truly concerned about your internet privacy, just don't do anything from a computer that can be traced back to you.
Or an internet access point that can be traced back to you? Have you ever tried to get internet access without KYC? it's not impossible, but it's far from de facto.
I can be concerned about my privacy without being a criminal. That's the chilling effect.
"am I going to get in trouble for searching for mRNA research trial data when the government decides to mandate a shot"? And that's what the 4th amendment is there to protect against.
"is the government going to show up at my door for committing code to bitcoin?"
"is the government going to show up at my door in 8 years for advocating for the 1st, 2nd, 4th, or 10th amendment today in 2025?"
reply
I don't think you should be prosecuted for searching mRNA research data or contributing code to bitcoin or any of those things.
But I do think if a private individual who lived in a private residential address was murdered, it's ok to get a list of people who searched for that individual and their address. That's all.
I can't fully explain all my thoughts, but I just think that the type of crime matters and the type of electronic data being searched matters too.
reply
type of electronic data being searched matters too.
very much.
if it is the government collecting the data, they must do so lawfully. and the 4th described the limits of government
if it's private data, and Google wants to investigate that house-fire, awesome.. thanks vigilante Google.
but giving the government authority to demand google handover their private property (the information they collect in the process of providing service) is quite a different thing... amd the story here in wired is sculpted as just "gumshoe detective solves heinous murder by ignoring the pesky constitutional protection"... then the buried lede: "gumshoe detective 's warrant is being duplicated across the country"
in other words:
government doesn't need to build panopticon if it can force businesses to be the panopticon. citizens just get shotgun panopticon'd
put another way:
wouldn't it be great if you could get back all the bitcoin you ever had spent?
you can't, because the protocol protects private property. that's why it is so important to have painful discussions about consensus.
reply