4 ms·
Wow. Quote: > But I can’t think of a prior case where the feds unambiguously acknowledged using Google search logs this way: to, apparently, zero in on people
by ColanR 6y ago
Wow. Quote:
> But I can’t think of a prior case where the feds unambiguously acknowledged using Google search logs this way: to, apparently, zero in on people who searched the wrong word at the wrong time.
- darawk 6y agoThey're not actually using it to zero in on someone, though. What they're doing is using it to build a case against someone they already suspect: Roger Stone.
- RandomBacon 6y agoToday, sure. Tomorrow, it may be what OP said.
- mike_d 6y agoToday, federal police randomly snatch protesters off the streets in to unmarked vans. Tomorrow, who knows... You can always make a slippery slope argument, but it doesn't make it reasonable.
- srtjstjsj 6y agoI can't imagine what you are trying to insinuate. What's the difference between a trend and a slippery slope?
- darawk 6y agoAll changes are trends. Assuming that the trend will extrapolate to its logical extreme without supporting evidence is unreasonable, however.
- im3w1l 6y agoInstead of abstract arguments and unrelated parallels let's get back on track with the specifics here. Why/why not will scope increase in this particular way? What temptations are there? What safeguards are there?
- unishark 6y agoUnfortunately, building a case in FBI terms often means entrapping someone in a crime related to the investigation itself, when they can't get any proof of the actual crime they are supposed to be investigating.