7 ms·

“Insider abuse is a problem across the tech industry” Rarely do I think we need more laws and regulations, but that these are not disclosed to the public and i

“Insider abuse is a problem across the tech industry” Rarely do I think we need more laws and regulations, but that these are not disclosed to the public and impacted users as data breaches strikes me as terrifyingly unjust. When cops misuse power to do this they are criminally prosecuted. Seems appropriate.

jedimastert 5y ago
> When cops misuse power to do this they are criminally prosecuted. I don't disagree that this is completely unjust, but cops are also completely under-prosecuted for basically anything (in the US, at least).
- eli 5y ago
  And in most cases are in fact legally immune from any personal liability.
  - Threeve303 5y ago
    This is correct. Qualified immunity is something that not many people understand. Cops can say or do anything about you for as long as they want and you have no recourse.
    - galangalalgol 5y ago
      colorado has ended it, has the feared wave of unfounded civilsuits appeared?
- trasz 5y ago
  US isn’t really representative for a proper law enforcement regulation, just like it isn’t a good example of working health insurance. Or the judicial system.
jeffbee 5y ago
There’s literally nothing in this article about user data, except innuendo. Every time they say user data it is at the end of “company secrets or user data”. They can construct the same misleading sentence out of “company secrets or the location of the holy grail” and it would be just as true.
- hn_go_brrrrr 5y ago
  My read is the leaked doc itself used this construction. If so, it's Google doing the obfuscating, not TFA.
  - SpicyLemonZest 5y ago
    I think it's impossible to understand without knowing more about the document whether it was obfuscation or just categorization. There are all kinds of legitimate reasons a document might not include a detailed breakdown of "employees fired for security violation".

jedimastert 5y ago

> When cops misuse power to do this they are criminally prosecuted. I don't disagree that this is completely unjust, but cops are also completely under-prosecuted for basically anything (in the US, at least).

eli 5y ago
And in most cases are in fact legally immune from any personal liability.
- Threeve303 5y ago
  This is correct. Qualified immunity is something that not many people understand. Cops can say or do anything about you for as long as they want and you have no recourse.
  - galangalalgol 5y ago
    colorado has ended it, has the feared wave of unfounded civilsuits appeared?
trasz 5y ago
US isn’t really representative for a proper law enforcement regulation, just like it isn’t a good example of working health insurance. Or the judicial system.

jeffbee 5y ago

There’s literally nothing in this article about user data, except innuendo. Every time they say user data it is at the end of “company secrets or user data”. They can construct the same misleading sentence out of “company secrets or the location of the holy grail” and it would be just as true.

hn_go_brrrrr 5y ago
My read is the leaked doc itself used this construction. If so, it's Google doing the obfuscating, not TFA.
- SpicyLemonZest 5y ago
  I think it's impossible to understand without knowing more about the document whether it was obfuscation or just categorization. There are all kinds of legitimate reasons a document might not include a detailed breakdown of "employees fired for security violation".