4 ms·
TL;DR: not so much "data on Aaron Swartz" as "metadata on Swartz's email correspondence, as part of an unrelated investigation". The amount of email addresses
by zozbot123 8y ago
TL;DR: not so much "data on Aaron Swartz" as "metadata on Swartz's email correspondence, as part of an unrelated investigation". The amount of email addresses about which 'metadata' was collected was obviously quite large, so it would be a mistake to read anything of significance into the fact that Swartz's email was involved.
- jstanley 8y ago> The amount of email addresses about which 'metadata' was collected was obviously quite large This is the significance that should be read into it.
- zozbot123 8y agoThat's par for the course for the sort of investigation we're talking about, though. It's not a 'fishing expedition', it's just a practice that's narrowly tailored to try and figure out the structure of highly dangerous crime cells and networks, as well as the possible perpetrators involved. There's a bit of a scare about 'metadata' collection lately, but as a tool it does have its narrow uses.
- shkkmo 8y agoDo you have any basis for your claims of "narrowly tailored" or are you just making up facts? If it were narrowly tailored, the FBI wouldn't be able to access the information when conducting an investigation that would not have otherwise been able to obtain that information without a court order. Additionally your attempt to justify why this is OK is also wrong, NSLs are not supposed to be used to investigate organized crime, but to investigate and prevent terrorist attacks.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]