4 ms·

Proportionality, legitimacy, process and oversight. If the FBI thinks someone is making a nuclear bomb in some postal code, there should be a process for helpi

by jariel 6y ago

Proportionality, legitimacy, process and oversight. If the FBI thinks someone is making a nuclear bomb in some postal code, there should be a process for helping to sort that out, because the risks are existential. For other things, it's more tricky. For smaller issues it shouldn't be in the toolbox.

jaywalk 6y ago
If the FBI thinks someone is making a nuclear bomb, they should have much better evidence than Google searches. Nuclear weapons are fascinating, and I'm sure that there are plenty of people all over the country (myself included) who have dug into how they work even though they aren't going to build one.
- jariel 6y ago
  So 1) It's not always about 'evidence' they may be trying to find someone 2) they may need 'evidence' to provide more aggressive warrants, or possibly obtain the right to make an arrest while they don't have the final evidence and 3) court cases are hard - you need to have everything lined up. Raiding the garage they find materials, someone could can say 'It wasn't me' but when they show searches being made from the Google account ... then that's evidence relating the materials to intent etc.. It's not rocket science to make some rules so we don't end up in dystopia and at the same time can get information we really need. We just have to be smart about it. Edit: case and point, literally as we speak [1] plot to kidnap/overthrow Michigan Governor by armed quasi-militia. There's no doubt technology is used in the thwarting of this. "The FBI became aware of the scheme ... in early 2020 through a social media". [1] https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/08/politics/fbi-plot-michigan-governor-gretchen-whitmer/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/08/politics/fbi-plot-michigan-go...
dilyevsky 6y ago
> If the FBI thinks someone is making a nuclear bomb in some postal code, there should be a process for helping to sort that out Constitutional way to do that would be to fly a drone and see which house lights up ;)
- jariel 6y ago
  There's nothing remotely unconstitutional about search warrants, also, the way we would foil a situation of 'existential concern' would be whatever is most likely to solve the problem.
  - dilyevsky 6y ago
    ANAL but “give me all IPs that searched for ‘isotope separation’ in certain zipcode” is not in fact a constitutional search warrant (or at least shouldn’t be in a non totalitarian state)
    - jariel 6y ago
      If there is a legitimate threat of someone making nuclear weapons / WMDs, then there is 100% legitimacy for this kind of request - as for the constitutionality, under EU/US/Canada Constitution, it would pass, hands down, without question. The reason I use the 'nuclear weapon / WMD' argument is because it's fairly extreme, and it's to get people to snap out of the default anti-government/dystopian mindsets to remind us what the law is effectively there for. While such situations are rare, they do exist, and they demonstrate the length at which we have to go to keep civic order - and very legitimately so. So it would be 'authoritarian' to conduct such searches when looking for someone not paying their taxes, and definitely unlawful for politicians using this on their opponents. But it would be 'practical and lawful' in this scenario. But it's all moot - in reality, if there were a 'real threat' - the National Guard, Police, FBI etc. would be doing full searches of everyone's home, block by block, helicopters, dogs, SWAT Teams, Firemen, the whole thing. There wouldn't even be popular outrage, the ACLU wouldn't be putting up a fuss, everyone would be at home, in fear, watching CNN, until the 'found the guy'. It's basically false to suggest that warrants or information can't be used legally in pursuit of a crime - it's a knee-jerk reaction I feel by the anarcho/privacy ethos common here on HN. It entirely depends on the situation - risk, proportionately, oversight, tactics of execution etc.. And it's never perfectly clear, that's why civilization is hard.
      - dilyevsky 6y ago

by jariel 6y ago

jaywalk 6y ago

If the FBI thinks someone is making a nuclear bomb, they should have much better evidence than Google searches. Nuclear weapons are fascinating, and I'm sure that there are plenty of people all over the country (myself included) who have dug into how they work even though they aren't going to build one.

jariel 6y ago
So 1) It's not always about 'evidence' they may be trying to find someone 2) they may need 'evidence' to provide more aggressive warrants, or possibly obtain the right to make an arrest while they don't have the final evidence and 3) court cases are hard - you need to have everything lined up. Raiding the garage they find materials, someone could can say 'It wasn't me' but when they show searches being made from the Google account ... then that's evidence relating the materials to intent etc.. It's not rocket science to make some rules so we don't end up in dystopia and at the same time can get information we really need. We just have to be smart about it. Edit: case and point, literally as we speak [1] plot to kidnap/overthrow Michigan Governor by armed quasi-militia. There's no doubt technology is used in the thwarting of this. "The FBI became aware of the scheme ... in early 2020 through a social media". [1] https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/08/politics/fbi-plot-michigan-governor-gretchen-whitmer/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/08/politics/fbi-plot-michigan-go...

dilyevsky 6y ago

> If the FBI thinks someone is making a nuclear bomb in some postal code, there should be a process for helping to sort that out Constitutional way to do that would be to fly a drone and see which house lights up ;)

jariel 6y ago
There's nothing remotely unconstitutional about search warrants, also, the way we would foil a situation of 'existential concern' would be whatever is most likely to solve the problem.
- dilyevsky 6y ago
  ANAL but “give me all IPs that searched for ‘isotope separation’ in certain zipcode” is not in fact a constitutional search warrant (or at least shouldn’t be in a non totalitarian state)
  - jariel 6y ago
    If there is a legitimate threat of someone making nuclear weapons / WMDs, then there is 100% legitimacy for this kind of request - as for the constitutionality, under EU/US/Canada Constitution, it would pass, hands down, without question. The reason I use the 'nuclear weapon / WMD' argument is because it's fairly extreme, and it's to get people to snap out of the default anti-government/dystopian mindsets to remind us what the law is effectively there for. While such situations are rare, they do exist, and they demonstrate the length at which we have to go to keep civic order - and very legitimately so. So it would be 'authoritarian' to conduct such searches when looking for someone not paying their taxes, and definitely unlawful for politicians using this on their opponents. But it would be 'practical and lawful' in this scenario. But it's all moot - in reality, if there were a 'real threat' - the National Guard, Police, FBI etc. would be doing full searches of everyone's home, block by block, helicopters, dogs, SWAT Teams, Firemen, the whole thing. There wouldn't even be popular outrage, the ACLU wouldn't be putting up a fuss, everyone would be at home, in fear, watching CNN, until the 'found the guy'. It's basically false to suggest that warrants or information can't be used legally in pursuit of a crime - it's a knee-jerk reaction I feel by the anarcho/privacy ethos common here on HN. It entirely depends on the situation - risk, proportionately, oversight, tactics of execution etc.. And it's never perfectly clear, that's why civilization is hard.
    - dilyevsky 6y ago