4 ms·

Yesterday: https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/a-dad-took-photos-of-his-naked-toddler-for-the-doctor-google-flagged-him-as-a-criminal/ https://www.seattle

• sushisource 4y ago
  It's a valid point but, is pretty different in its intent from what GP comment is getting at. This wasn't a result of "let's target this group we've deemed political enemies", it was "we're attempting to enforce this law (mind you, effectively everyone agrees with) via data collection". I can buy how that's a pretty darn thin line, but, in practice I think it's also true that we haven't seen much evidence of the more shady interpretation that GP's post implies.
  • jwalton 4y ago
    I think this example was even worse, because it wasn’t the government asking Google for data about a user, Google went out and proactively offered it (and erased this poor guy’s email and cancelled his phone). There’s also been plenty of cases where people were charged with a crime on the basis of a warrant to find all phones in a given location at a given time. The political-dissidents-from-audio-clips sounds a little far fetched, but certainly there have been cases where Alexa recordings were supoenaed and used against their owners. GP was certainly right that companies collecting data about me is a liability for me.