3 ms·
You're right, but then you have the problem of credibility. If Google's records are credible for this, then what's the chance that somebody will notice if some
by Aerroon 6y ago
You're right, but then you have the problem of credibility. If Google's records are credible for this, then what's the chance that somebody will notice if some of those records are manufactured? It's like forging signatures - it's a problem because we trust signatures to some extent.
- perl4ever 6y agoI don't exactly disagree in one sense, but this argument seems like it kind of generalizes to the idea that "better is worse", which I can't agree to. The more technical details of recordkeeping or surveillance that there are, the more likely a frame-up will have flaws that people notice.
- sjy 6y agoI don’t think the argument generalises quite that far, but it does go as far as “more information is worse.” The presumption of innocence is a valuable principle to which this applies. We ignore evidence that suggests that someone is guilty of a crime until the court process has finished, and if they’re “probably guilty” we say they’re actually “not guilty” for fairness reasons.
- Aunche 6y agoPolice can and have forged evidence without having to resort to forcing a company to do so. The latter is more risky as there is a greater likelihood of a leak.