3 ms·

Warrants on everyone in a particular geographical region purely by virtue of them being in that geographical region? Yeah I'm against that

• quinnjh 5y ago
  You should research the 100 mile border rights-exclusion zone that includes most major metropolitan areas, or maybe dont...
• LudwigNagasena 5y ago
  They didn’t get identifying information on everyone if that’s what you think. They worked with Google to narrow it down to two individuals. That doesn’t seem like an abuse of a crazy law from patriot act. It’s not like they swatted someone’s apartment for hate speech on Twitter without a warrant, someone tried to burn down a police building.
  • NHQ 5y ago
    What you are missing is the fact that Google is protecting rights against the state; but they could just as easily decide to give up all the data instead of anonymizing and parsing it for them. When corporations are holding the privacy line against the state, there are wolves in the pasture.
    • emteycz 5y ago
      It's courts, not corporations. The corporation is protecting the customer because the law says so, and the courts enforce it. This is an example of the system working, not a negative.
      • kodah 5y ago
        I'm a very big privacy enthusiast and you're right. Part of effective privacy law is passing rules to ensure companies (who have more power and financial incentive) protect their customers.