5 ms·

You have some data in the hands of any government, and once you have a judge's approval, the data will be obtained by the authority regardless where you are. It

You have some data in the hands of any government, and once you have a judge's approval, the data will be obtained by the authority regardless where you are. It makes sense that the data should be stored on your devices only. If a criminal is caught with his phone, the data can still be obtained by the police (the same as phone records for example), and it can still be useful for criminal investigation, and normal citizen don't have to worry about their data. It is actually achievable with Google and Apple's approach. And I think it was a genuine answer. This is a reply to MP, not a random reporter on streets.

jesterson 6y ago
I believe you're missing the point. At first, they explain the information is collected solely for medical reasons. Now they say they can use it as they please. Don't you see fallacy here? I am sure it was a genuine answer - that's why I was surprised. Usually those things are sugar covered.
- coldtea 6y ago
  >At first, they explain the information is collected solely for medical reasons. Now they say they can use it as they please. Don't you see fallacy here? Technically not a fallacy (as there's no logical fault in what they said). Just falling back on a promise to the public.
  - hagibborim 6y ago
    It's not a logical fallacy, but it's still a fallacy.
    - coldtea 6y ago
      You keep using this word "fallacy". I don't think it means what you think it means [1] (a) a deceptive, misleading, or false notion, belief, etc.: That the world is flat was at one time a popular fallacy. (b) a misleading or unsound argument. (c) deceptive, misleading, or false nature; erroneousness. (d) Logic. any of various types of erroneous reasoning that render arguments logically unsound. [1] to paraphrase "The Princess Bride"
      - hagibborim 6y ago
        This usage fits definitions a, b, and c. This very definition draws a distinction between a 'fallacy' and a 'logical fallacy'
        coldtea 6y ago
        >This usage fits definitions a, b, and c. No, it doesn't. Government: - "We will use data just for medical purposes" Government (later): - "Guess what, we lied/we recant: we will use them for other state purposes too". There's nothing fallacious in (a), (b) or (c) way about either statement or the whole situation.
        hungryforcodes 6y ago
        It's a brilliant example of doublethink you did there.
  - TeMPOraL 6y ago
    Not only that, it's also the counterexample to calling "slippery slope" a fallacy. After all, slippery slope is not a fallacy if the slope is, in fact, slippery.

jesterson 6y ago

I believe you're missing the point. At first, they explain the information is collected solely for medical reasons. Now they say they can use it as they please. Don't you see fallacy here? I am sure it was a genuine answer - that's why I was surprised. Usually those things are sugar covered.

coldtea 6y ago
>At first, they explain the information is collected solely for medical reasons. Now they say they can use it as they please. Don't you see fallacy here? Technically not a fallacy (as there's no logical fault in what they said). Just falling back on a promise to the public.
- hagibborim 6y ago
  It's not a logical fallacy, but it's still a fallacy.
  - coldtea 6y ago
    You keep using this word "fallacy". I don't think it means what you think it means [1] (a) a deceptive, misleading, or false notion, belief, etc.: That the world is flat was at one time a popular fallacy. (b) a misleading or unsound argument. (c) deceptive, misleading, or false nature; erroneousness. (d) Logic. any of various types of erroneous reasoning that render arguments logically unsound. [1] to paraphrase "The Princess Bride"
    - hagibborim 6y ago
      This usage fits definitions a, b, and c. This very definition draws a distinction between a 'fallacy' and a 'logical fallacy'
      - coldtea 6y ago
        >This usage fits definitions a, b, and c. No, it doesn't. Government: - "We will use data just for medical purposes" Government (later): - "Guess what, we lied/we recant: we will use them for other state purposes too". There's nothing fallacious in (a), (b) or (c) way about either statement or the whole situation.
        hungryforcodes 6y ago
        It's a brilliant example of doublethink you did there.
- TeMPOraL 6y ago
  Not only that, it's also the counterexample to calling "slippery slope" a fallacy. After all, slippery slope is not a fallacy if the slope is, in fact, slippery.