9 ms·

> Such data may be useful, it says, to “identify every person who attended a protest or rally based on their smartphone location or ad-tracking records.” "May"

> Such data may be useful, it says, to “identify every person who attended a protest or rally based on their smartphone location or ad-tracking records.” "May"? This is exactly how the January 6th protestors were identified.

some_furry 3y ago
I don't doubt that this technique was used for the people who stormed the capital on January 6th, but I would hesitate to describe many of them as "protestors".
- roarcher 3y ago
  You're free to describe them however you like, it's irrelevant to my point.
  - phpisthebest 3y ago
    Remember to some people "there are no bad tactics, only bad targets", lots of people are blinded when their perceived political enemies are getting "what they deserve" and fail to understand the powers and tactics used on their political enemies will soon be used on them.... They will then go all shocked pikachu face then the government assault team in their door step taking them way... how can this bee they were the good ones.. they were on the "right side of history"... Welcome to the system, everyone's a victim Doesn't matter if you're red or blue it hates you all
    - hahahasotruez 3y ago
      This is literally what the Seattle populace is now doing after years of screaming "Defund the police". They have come full circle demanding more police presence due to raising crime rates. You get what you protest for or something like it.
  - whoopdedo 3y ago
    It's not irrelevant to point out the false equivalency of putting constitutionally protected speech on the same level as forced entry, assault, and destruction of property.
    - roarcher 3y ago
      It's irrelevant because my entire and only point is that the government has this capability, no "may" about it. Whether my choice of words implied the level of ideological purity that you wished to see has nothing to do with that.
    - coldtea 3y ago
      Any protest march and demonstration worth its salt can be described with terms such as "forced entry, assault, and destruction of property" (and has been)...
    - graphe 3y ago
      I don't see this sentiment for the George Floyd riots that plagued the whole country for longer and did significantly more damage, instead of caring for corrupt politicians why not persecute those who robbed and stole from the common citizen. If a protest doesn't make the news what's the point?
      - thebooktocome 3y ago
        You don't see it because you're not looking for it. Plenty of protest groups were extremely vigilant about minimizing property damage and rooting out violent infiltrators. The George Floyd protests were far more policed: twenty-five protestors died; around 14k were arrested. [1] Hard to say any 1/6er suffered a similar fate, despite their significantly more egregious apparent crimes. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Floyd_protests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Floyd_protests
        graphe 3y ago
        Do you not see the irony of your post? Did you not see the same at the 1/6? If they were more policed, the fires, and destruction didn't help it make it appear so. I could see the Floyd protests/riots outside. 1/6 affected some .1% of the elite I could care less about. I'm still trying to see a reason why the common man hates that the citizens protest the government, or cares so much for the corrupt elite of either party. The government is not your friend. If the Floyd protests went to Washington it could have been less 1996 and more MLK.
- rootusrootus 3y ago
  Actually, let's do call them protesters. If you want to get universal agreement on the need for privacy regulations, you need to present it a way that does not immediately turn away your intended audience. When both sides really agree on something, it's amazing how fast it gets done. Which, of course, is why there are people trying to hard to keep both sides from ever agreeing.
  - idiotsecant 3y ago
    On one hand I know that this is true. We have to guard against special pleading that allows oppression of those we disagree with because that inevitably leads to our own oppression sooner or later. On the other hand I understand what the post you're replying to is saying, even if it's not said extremely well. There is an enormous online narrative with a lot of money and power behind it trying to normalize the most violent and anti-democratic parts of the right wing of American politics and using that to drive views, clicks, and votes. I'm normally not someone to clutch pearls and will be the first one to acknowledge that the vast majority of Americans are just decent enough people trying to figure out how to keep fed, healthy, and safe. But the tendency toward fascism in the human animal is something we need vigilance against, as demonstrated over and over again in human history. The people who attempted to violently attack the seat of democratically elected power in this country were not protestors. There were protestors outside, but the people who crossed the line to breaking and entering, assault, and terrorism were not protestors.
    - graphe 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - MisterBastahrd 3y ago
        Yeah, that part where they were breaking down a window of a locked door in an attempt to get into the house inner chambers to attempt to impede the democratic process of the United States was totally a protest and not an insurrection. The folks who were non-violent never made it inside the capital because they were there to protest? They were protestors. The other ones? They were insurrectionists and they all deserve prison.
- PM_me_your_math 3y ago
  [flagged]
wmeredith 3y ago
Yep. It was also used against Occupy Wall Street protestors.
kgwxd 3y ago
Source?
- roarcher 3y ago
  https://www.businessinsider.com/doj-is-mapping-cell-phone-location-data-from-capitol-rioters-2021-3 https://www.businessinsider.com/doj-is-mapping-cell-phone-lo...
  - kgwxd 3y ago
    "subpoenaed cell phone data". It's completely justifiable, legally and morally, and been happening since cell phones existed, way before January 6th 2021. The article's claim that it was somehow new to this event shines a spotlight on their agenda.
    - zer8k 3y ago
      Youre either not well informed or being deliberately obtuse. Cell phone data has been used in individual cases for almost as long as cell phones existed. J6 was one of the first cases where mass surveillance paired with ad tracking and tower pings were used in combination for mass arrests. We did not see this when the George Floyd riots occurred Despite the fact federal buildings were attacked yet it was brought out for this. It's very indicative of the existence of a police state that chooses its targets in a politically expedient way. What we saw the government do and the fact the alleged conspirators have largely not been charged with anything but rather left to rot should terrify anyone. Just because you aren't the target today doesnt mean you won't be tomorrow.
      - edmundsauto 3y ago
        I understand it might appear this way to someone who already has specific political leanings, but as someone without a dog in this fight - that does not appear supported by the evidence. Your conclusions reveal more about your priors than anything else.
      - deleted 3y ago
weaksauce 3y ago
doubtful. they were issuing subpoenas to the cell companies for their records of the tower registrations for a certain time frame when crimes were being committed. It doesn't take much to identify the owner of a smartphone via that and then correlate that with driver's license photo ids and correlate that with surveillance camera footage to bring a case. that had nothing to do with peaceful protester tracking but bog standard criminal investigation.
- roarcher 3y ago
  I posted the source in another comment but I'll put it here as well: https://www.businessinsider.com/doj-is-mapping-cell-phone-location-data-from-capitol-rioters-2021-3 https://www.businessinsider.com/doj-is-mapping-cell-phone-lo... The data came from Google and included GPS data. Either way, I don't think that matters. My point is that tech companies store data that can be used to identify everyone present at a specific location and timeframe, and that data is easily available to the government. There's no "may" about it.
  - weaksauce 3y ago
    sure... I don't disagree with you there. they did need to get a subpoena for that information using all the other evidence that was publicly out there on facebook that the affidavit said. they were using an android device that tracks you if you let it and stores that information on google's servers if you let it. you don't have to have that feature on and just having the phone on you is sufficient to be triangulated by the cell towers. I don't see how this is incompatible with modern society. google didn't just give up the data without going through the judge granting a subpoena. even if they didn't have that cell phone record it's just one piece of evidence of many that would still likely get a conviction. it didn't start at gps data from google... it went from public posts on facebook to the email and phone number account associated with that to the google account associated with that to the gps data associated with the google account. if you show me them using a reach around route to get that gps data and persecute peaceful protestors that haven't been suspected of criminal activity then i do agree it's troubling. if you want me to agree that the government is not within their rights seek evidence via normal, judge approved, subpoenas to investigate/prosecute people storming the capital and doing legitimate crimes then i disagree. you need probable cause and that bar should be fairly high.

some_furry 3y ago

I don't doubt that this technique was used for the people who stormed the capital on January 6th, but I would hesitate to describe many of them as "protestors".

roarcher 3y ago
You're free to describe them however you like, it's irrelevant to my point.
- phpisthebest 3y ago
  Remember to some people "there are no bad tactics, only bad targets", lots of people are blinded when their perceived political enemies are getting "what they deserve" and fail to understand the powers and tactics used on their political enemies will soon be used on them.... They will then go all shocked pikachu face then the government assault team in their door step taking them way... how can this bee they were the good ones.. they were on the "right side of history"... Welcome to the system, everyone's a victim Doesn't matter if you're red or blue it hates you all
  - hahahasotruez 3y ago
    This is literally what the Seattle populace is now doing after years of screaming "Defund the police". They have come full circle demanding more police presence due to raising crime rates. You get what you protest for or something like it.
- whoopdedo 3y ago
  It's not irrelevant to point out the false equivalency of putting constitutionally protected speech on the same level as forced entry, assault, and destruction of property.
  - roarcher 3y ago
    It's irrelevant because my entire and only point is that the government has this capability, no "may" about it. Whether my choice of words implied the level of ideological purity that you wished to see has nothing to do with that.
  - coldtea 3y ago
    Any protest march and demonstration worth its salt can be described with terms such as "forced entry, assault, and destruction of property" (and has been)...
  - graphe 3y ago
    I don't see this sentiment for the George Floyd riots that plagued the whole country for longer and did significantly more damage, instead of caring for corrupt politicians why not persecute those who robbed and stole from the common citizen. If a protest doesn't make the news what's the point?
    - thebooktocome 3y ago
      You don't see it because you're not looking for it. Plenty of protest groups were extremely vigilant about minimizing property damage and rooting out violent infiltrators. The George Floyd protests were far more policed: twenty-five protestors died; around 14k were arrested. [1] Hard to say any 1/6er suffered a similar fate, despite their significantly more egregious apparent crimes. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Floyd_protests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Floyd_protests
      - graphe 3y ago
        Do you not see the irony of your post? Did you not see the same at the 1/6? If they were more policed, the fires, and destruction didn't help it make it appear so. I could see the Floyd protests/riots outside. 1/6 affected some .1% of the elite I could care less about. I'm still trying to see a reason why the common man hates that the citizens protest the government, or cares so much for the corrupt elite of either party. The government is not your friend. If the Floyd protests went to Washington it could have been less 1996 and more MLK.
rootusrootus 3y ago
Actually, let's do call them protesters. If you want to get universal agreement on the need for privacy regulations, you need to present it a way that does not immediately turn away your intended audience. When both sides really agree on something, it's amazing how fast it gets done. Which, of course, is why there are people trying to hard to keep both sides from ever agreeing.
- idiotsecant 3y ago
  On one hand I know that this is true. We have to guard against special pleading that allows oppression of those we disagree with because that inevitably leads to our own oppression sooner or later. On the other hand I understand what the post you're replying to is saying, even if it's not said extremely well. There is an enormous online narrative with a lot of money and power behind it trying to normalize the most violent and anti-democratic parts of the right wing of American politics and using that to drive views, clicks, and votes. I'm normally not someone to clutch pearls and will be the first one to acknowledge that the vast majority of Americans are just decent enough people trying to figure out how to keep fed, healthy, and safe. But the tendency toward fascism in the human animal is something we need vigilance against, as demonstrated over and over again in human history. The people who attempted to violently attack the seat of democratically elected power in this country were not protestors. There were protestors outside, but the people who crossed the line to breaking and entering, assault, and terrorism were not protestors.
  - graphe 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - MisterBastahrd 3y ago
      Yeah, that part where they were breaking down a window of a locked door in an attempt to get into the house inner chambers to attempt to impede the democratic process of the United States was totally a protest and not an insurrection. The folks who were non-violent never made it inside the capital because they were there to protest? They were protestors. The other ones? They were insurrectionists and they all deserve prison.
PM_me_your_math 3y ago
[flagged]

wmeredith 3y ago

Yep. It was also used against Occupy Wall Street protestors.

kgwxd 3y ago

Source?

roarcher 3y ago
https://www.businessinsider.com/doj-is-mapping-cell-phone-location-data-from-capitol-rioters-2021-3 https://www.businessinsider.com/doj-is-mapping-cell-phone-lo...
- kgwxd 3y ago
  "subpoenaed cell phone data". It's completely justifiable, legally and morally, and been happening since cell phones existed, way before January 6th 2021. The article's claim that it was somehow new to this event shines a spotlight on their agenda.
  - zer8k 3y ago
    Youre either not well informed or being deliberately obtuse. Cell phone data has been used in individual cases for almost as long as cell phones existed. J6 was one of the first cases where mass surveillance paired with ad tracking and tower pings were used in combination for mass arrests. We did not see this when the George Floyd riots occurred Despite the fact federal buildings were attacked yet it was brought out for this. It's very indicative of the existence of a police state that chooses its targets in a politically expedient way. What we saw the government do and the fact the alleged conspirators have largely not been charged with anything but rather left to rot should terrify anyone. Just because you aren't the target today doesnt mean you won't be tomorrow.
    - edmundsauto 3y ago
      I understand it might appear this way to someone who already has specific political leanings, but as someone without a dog in this fight - that does not appear supported by the evidence. Your conclusions reveal more about your priors than anything else.
    - deleted 3y ago

weaksauce 3y ago

doubtful. they were issuing subpoenas to the cell companies for their records of the tower registrations for a certain time frame when crimes were being committed. It doesn't take much to identify the owner of a smartphone via that and then correlate that with driver's license photo ids and correlate that with surveillance camera footage to bring a case. that had nothing to do with peaceful protester tracking but bog standard criminal investigation.

roarcher 3y ago
I posted the source in another comment but I'll put it here as well: https://www.businessinsider.com/doj-is-mapping-cell-phone-location-data-from-capitol-rioters-2021-3 https://www.businessinsider.com/doj-is-mapping-cell-phone-lo... The data came from Google and included GPS data. Either way, I don't think that matters. My point is that tech companies store data that can be used to identify everyone present at a specific location and timeframe, and that data is easily available to the government. There's no "may" about it.
- weaksauce 3y ago
  sure... I don't disagree with you there. they did need to get a subpoena for that information using all the other evidence that was publicly out there on facebook that the affidavit said. they were using an android device that tracks you if you let it and stores that information on google's servers if you let it. you don't have to have that feature on and just having the phone on you is sufficient to be triangulated by the cell towers. I don't see how this is incompatible with modern society. google didn't just give up the data without going through the judge granting a subpoena. even if they didn't have that cell phone record it's just one piece of evidence of many that would still likely get a conviction. it didn't start at gps data from google... it went from public posts on facebook to the email and phone number account associated with that to the google account associated with that to the gps data associated with the google account. if you show me them using a reach around route to get that gps data and persecute peaceful protestors that haven't been suspected of criminal activity then i do agree it's troubling. if you want me to agree that the government is not within their rights seek evidence via normal, judge approved, subpoenas to investigate/prosecute people storming the capital and doing legitimate crimes then i disagree. you need probable cause and that bar should be fairly high.