3 ms·
So you agree that court orders are not that fancy a deterrent that you made it out to be. You said > If they wanted to intentionally examine your network tra
by srean 6y ago
So you agree that court orders are not that fancy a deterrent that you made it out to be.
You said
> If they wanted to intentionally examine your network traffic, that would require a court order.
I just gave you an example when that did not matter.
> Are you interested in talking about surveillance specifically or every talking point of the usual anti-American tirades?
Whenever you are willing to have an honest discussion rather than a blinkered and intentionally misleading cheerleading
- deathgrips 6y agoThey don't need a court order to sniff packets and do bulk collection. All that data goes into huge data centers. If they want to query that collected data for an American's information, they get a warrant. No human looks at an American's data before getting a warrant. You'd do well to familiarize yourself with their process, which is highly publicized.
- srean 6y ago> No human looks at an American's data before getting a warrant. Prove it.