4 ms·

All any investigation on me would find is I can't for the life of me remember the order of in_array and google it way more often than I should.

ruined 6y ago
it's cool that your life is perfect and free of danger. consider that you are an outlier
- gowld 6y ago
  Most people are not at risk for being unjustly harmed by law enforcement due to their online data. The people that are at risk are outliers, and still worthy of concern.
  - zepto 6y ago
    > Most people are not at risk for being unjustly harmed by law enforcement due to their online data. This isn’t true. The risk is currently low of actually being targeted but that doesn’t mean people are not at risk. Also law enforcement is not the only problem by a long shot. Civil suits, family court, etc, all routinely use browsing history data.
    - freedom42 6y ago
      Here is something from 2021. "Police confirms that Disha was arrested after Google shared details." https://www.indiatoday.in/technology/news/story/disha-ravi-arrest-puts-privacy-of-all-google-india-users-in-doubt-1769772-2021-02-16 https://www.indiatoday.in/technology/news/story/disha-ravi-a...
- dawnerd 6y ago
  Since I didn't explicitly say it, I'm not okay with giving out browsing history and 100% stand behind privacy controls and laws that prevent this completely.
  - ruined 6y ago
    thank you. unfortunately your comment was frustratingly indistinguishable from the "i've got nothing to hide" fallacy often seen in comment threads like this. when there's no way to tell you're being humorous, your language does the work of someone being serious. as the tumblr kids say, satire requires a clarity of purpose and target lest it be mistaken for and contribute to that which it intends to criticize.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
nerdponx 6y ago
This is like arguing that you don't need a right to a fair trial if you never break any laws.
why_Mr_Anderson 6y ago
If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him. (Cardinal Richelieu)
- gumby 6y ago
  Our company has decided we no longer need whiteboard interviews as we just contract with Google for candidates' search history (filtered for technical issues only of course!). (In case anyone thinks google sells search history retail: this is a joke...at least for now).
  - pdkl95 6y ago
    They wouldn't sell browsing histories; that data is a valuable asset. They would follow the model used by most "AI" products: an "AI"/"smart" service that launders candidates' history data into an opaque score. The hiring company's workload is reduced to mapping a score value onto their hiring plan, and Google will make a carefully worded claim that they are not selling personal information.
    - gumby 6y ago
      A shrewd distinction.
maccard 6y ago
Consider the UK is right now [0], as we speak, passing a bill that forces an ISP to hand over browsing data, without a warrant, to non-law enforcement agencies (a list of which is in the source below). Agencies like the DWP (who handle unemployment, and have been subject to much criticism on how they make decisions and handle clients) will have warrantless access to browsing data for specific people. A little far fetched, but if you're employed by one of those agencies, your boss (or bosses boss etc) can access _your_ data, find out how often you're googling basic information and use that information against you. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26430266 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26430266

ruined 6y ago

it's cool that your life is perfect and free of danger. consider that you are an outlier

gowld 6y ago
Most people are not at risk for being unjustly harmed by law enforcement due to their online data. The people that are at risk are outliers, and still worthy of concern.
- zepto 6y ago
  > Most people are not at risk for being unjustly harmed by law enforcement due to their online data. This isn’t true. The risk is currently low of actually being targeted but that doesn’t mean people are not at risk. Also law enforcement is not the only problem by a long shot. Civil suits, family court, etc, all routinely use browsing history data.
  - freedom42 6y ago
    Here is something from 2021. "Police confirms that Disha was arrested after Google shared details." https://www.indiatoday.in/technology/news/story/disha-ravi-arrest-puts-privacy-of-all-google-india-users-in-doubt-1769772-2021-02-16 https://www.indiatoday.in/technology/news/story/disha-ravi-a...
dawnerd 6y ago
Since I didn't explicitly say it, I'm not okay with giving out browsing history and 100% stand behind privacy controls and laws that prevent this completely.
- ruined 6y ago
  thank you. unfortunately your comment was frustratingly indistinguishable from the "i've got nothing to hide" fallacy often seen in comment threads like this. when there's no way to tell you're being humorous, your language does the work of someone being serious. as the tumblr kids say, satire requires a clarity of purpose and target lest it be mistaken for and contribute to that which it intends to criticize.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

nerdponx 6y ago

This is like arguing that you don't need a right to a fair trial if you never break any laws.

why_Mr_Anderson 6y ago

If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him. (Cardinal Richelieu)

gumby 6y ago
Our company has decided we no longer need whiteboard interviews as we just contract with Google for candidates' search history (filtered for technical issues only of course!). (In case anyone thinks google sells search history retail: this is a joke...at least for now).
- pdkl95 6y ago
  They wouldn't sell browsing histories; that data is a valuable asset. They would follow the model used by most "AI" products: an "AI"/"smart" service that launders candidates' history data into an opaque score. The hiring company's workload is reduced to mapping a score value onto their hiring plan, and Google will make a carefully worded claim that they are not selling personal information.
  - gumby 6y ago
    A shrewd distinction.

maccard 6y ago

Consider the UK is right now [0], as we speak, passing a bill that forces an ISP to hand over browsing data, without a warrant, to non-law enforcement agencies (a list of which is in the source below). Agencies like the DWP (who handle unemployment, and have been subject to much criticism on how they make decisions and handle clients) will have warrantless access to browsing data for specific people. A little far fetched, but if you're employed by one of those agencies, your boss (or bosses boss etc) can access _your_ data, find out how often you're googling basic information and use that information against you. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26430266 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26430266