3 ms·

This is not how the law works. If enriched uranium shows up at your door, you don't just get to hold onto it just because someone screwed up.

anonexpat 3y ago
Not quite equivalent. When the feds show up looking for the uranium, I can clearly see if they take my refrigerator with them when they leave.
eli 3y ago
If I give the uranium back and they want to search my house anyway they better have a warrant
- legitster 3y ago
  Okay, but if you demand a warrant to confirm you don't have uranium, you can't be surprised if they are going to treat you as hostile.
  - 0cf8612b2e1e 3y ago
    > The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Yeah, who the hell does this guy think he is? We want to explore every nook of his house and he gets uppity? Clearly something to hide.
  - rootsudo 3y ago
    How is that hostile? To be aware of your rights and state they can’t do an illegal search? Demanding a warrant to be searched is not hostile it’s the equivalent of saying no thank you. Hostile is when they have a warrant and you still refuse.
    - legitster 3y ago
      You cannot get a warrant without probably cause that a crime has been committed. So asking for a warrant to search your computer is literally asking to be charged with a crime. IANAL, but demanding a prosecutor and judge be involved when dealing with an IT department is really dumb. If you can just agree with their legal team (and your lawyer) on the stipulations of the search and confirmation, you can't be charged with further crimes if they find anything ("fruit of the poison tree"). But insisting on getting hit with a warrant means anything they find can be used against you.
      - ToucanLoucan 3y ago
        > You cannot get a warrant without probably cause that a crime has been committed. So asking for a warrant to search your computer is literally asking to be charged with a crime. That is just completely 100% wrong. Warrants are not (or at least, shouldn't be, your mileage may vary based on your local authorities) issued like candy. Prosecutors and judges issue warrants when there is probable cause to search in the event of a crime being committed by you, or simply being committed within an area to which you have access that the public does not. That does not mean you are being charged with a crime. I would agree that more often than not, if you are having warrants issued for searches of your home or business, a criminal prosecution for you is probably not an unreasonable thing to be concerned about, but these are not the same thing. One absolutely happens without the other all the time. > If you can just agree with their legal team on the stipulations of the search and confirmation, you can't be charged with further crimes if they find anything This is the same fallacious thinking as "If I've committed no crime I have nothing to fear from being searched," and that's not the point: the point is it is your right to privacy that they are demanding they now have the right to encroach upon to ensure the secure and to-their-satisfaction destruction of data they erroneously sent you which cannot be performed without some element of highly invasive search, and also cannot be requested without the implication that they don't trust you to have deleted it. This institution regardless of your individual opinions on it does not have your interest at heart: their negligence has placed the two of you as legal entities on opposing sides of a legal affair that can incredibly easily escalate to a conflict. Your lawyer is your FIRST call in this situation, and after that, you shut the fuck up and let your lawyer do their job.
  - plagiarist 3y ago
    I can be surprised, in fact: it is my constitutional right to not be searched and they are a government entity.
  - zoky 3y ago
    So the feds can just ship anyone uranium, then insist on searching their house “to confirm it’s all gone”, and you think they’d be able to get a warrant to do so if you refused to consent? Bypass anyone’s Fourth Amendment rights with this one weird trick discovered by some guy on HN (civil rights attorneys HATE him!)
    - tristan_hjkl 3y ago
      Or just say there's potentially uranium there? Pretty sure that's been done before
- pixl97 3y ago
  This said, don't be surprised if there is some government looking guy sitting at your property line with a Giger counter for a few days.
mschuster91 3y ago
> If enriched uranium shows up at your door, you don't just get to hold onto it just because someone screwed up. Yeah but that's because there are specific laws regulating possession of certain materials (NBC capable, explosives, drug precursors).
- legitster 3y ago
  Sure. But ill-gotten property is one of them.
richiebful1 3y ago
Uranium is illegal to possess and is a tangible object. Data is intangible and can be copied. If Matt gave into a request to search his hard drive, said search could extend into other devices, online accounts, etc. And that wouldn't even prove that he no longer possesses the data
- lazide 3y ago
  Uranium is totally legal to possess.
  - saagarjha 3y ago
    With many restrictions.
    - Legend2440 3y ago
      Not really. You can buy it on Amazon. Now, enriched uranium is a whole different story.
      - saagarjha 3y ago
        Yeah, but don't buy more than 7 kg.
        lazide 3y ago
        Up to a ton of ore I believe, as long as you don’t refine it. The rules are a bit inconsistent. As long as you don’t hurt anyone with it, or try to blackmail the US with it. [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/831 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/831] The 7kg limit is apparently a ‘depleted’ (aka refined/filtered) thing - https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part040/part040-0022.html https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part040/p... But commonly misquoted. 7kg is a pretty large quantity. It can be up to 150lbs a year if extracted from drinking water (!!).

anonexpat 3y ago

Not quite equivalent. When the feds show up looking for the uranium, I can clearly see if they take my refrigerator with them when they leave.

eli 3y ago

If I give the uranium back and they want to search my house anyway they better have a warrant

legitster 3y ago
Okay, but if you demand a warrant to confirm you don't have uranium, you can't be surprised if they are going to treat you as hostile.
- 0cf8612b2e1e 3y ago
  > The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Yeah, who the hell does this guy think he is? We want to explore every nook of his house and he gets uppity? Clearly something to hide.
- rootsudo 3y ago
  How is that hostile? To be aware of your rights and state they can’t do an illegal search? Demanding a warrant to be searched is not hostile it’s the equivalent of saying no thank you. Hostile is when they have a warrant and you still refuse.
  - legitster 3y ago
    You cannot get a warrant without probably cause that a crime has been committed. So asking for a warrant to search your computer is literally asking to be charged with a crime. IANAL, but demanding a prosecutor and judge be involved when dealing with an IT department is really dumb. If you can just agree with their legal team (and your lawyer) on the stipulations of the search and confirmation, you can't be charged with further crimes if they find anything ("fruit of the poison tree"). But insisting on getting hit with a warrant means anything they find can be used against you.
    - ToucanLoucan 3y ago
      > You cannot get a warrant without probably cause that a crime has been committed. So asking for a warrant to search your computer is literally asking to be charged with a crime. That is just completely 100% wrong. Warrants are not (or at least, shouldn't be, your mileage may vary based on your local authorities) issued like candy. Prosecutors and judges issue warrants when there is probable cause to search in the event of a crime being committed by you, or simply being committed within an area to which you have access that the public does not. That does not mean you are being charged with a crime. I would agree that more often than not, if you are having warrants issued for searches of your home or business, a criminal prosecution for you is probably not an unreasonable thing to be concerned about, but these are not the same thing. One absolutely happens without the other all the time. > If you can just agree with their legal team on the stipulations of the search and confirmation, you can't be charged with further crimes if they find anything This is the same fallacious thinking as "If I've committed no crime I have nothing to fear from being searched," and that's not the point: the point is it is your right to privacy that they are demanding they now have the right to encroach upon to ensure the secure and to-their-satisfaction destruction of data they erroneously sent you which cannot be performed without some element of highly invasive search, and also cannot be requested without the implication that they don't trust you to have deleted it. This institution regardless of your individual opinions on it does not have your interest at heart: their negligence has placed the two of you as legal entities on opposing sides of a legal affair that can incredibly easily escalate to a conflict. Your lawyer is your FIRST call in this situation, and after that, you shut the fuck up and let your lawyer do their job.
- plagiarist 3y ago
  I can be surprised, in fact: it is my constitutional right to not be searched and they are a government entity.
- zoky 3y ago
  So the feds can just ship anyone uranium, then insist on searching their house “to confirm it’s all gone”, and you think they’d be able to get a warrant to do so if you refused to consent? Bypass anyone’s Fourth Amendment rights with this one weird trick discovered by some guy on HN (civil rights attorneys HATE him!)
  - tristan_hjkl 3y ago
    Or just say there's potentially uranium there? Pretty sure that's been done before
pixl97 3y ago
This said, don't be surprised if there is some government looking guy sitting at your property line with a Giger counter for a few days.

mschuster91 3y ago

> If enriched uranium shows up at your door, you don't just get to hold onto it just because someone screwed up. Yeah but that's because there are specific laws regulating possession of certain materials (NBC capable, explosives, drug precursors).

legitster 3y ago
Sure. But ill-gotten property is one of them.

richiebful1 3y ago

Uranium is illegal to possess and is a tangible object. Data is intangible and can be copied. If Matt gave into a request to search his hard drive, said search could extend into other devices, online accounts, etc. And that wouldn't even prove that he no longer possesses the data

lazide 3y ago
Uranium is totally legal to possess.
- saagarjha 3y ago
  With many restrictions.
  - Legend2440 3y ago
    Not really. You can buy it on Amazon. Now, enriched uranium is a whole different story.
    - saagarjha 3y ago
      Yeah, but don't buy more than 7 kg.
      - lazide 3y ago
        Up to a ton of ore I believe, as long as you don’t refine it. The rules are a bit inconsistent. As long as you don’t hurt anyone with it, or try to blackmail the US with it. [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/831 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/831] The 7kg limit is apparently a ‘depleted’ (aka refined/filtered) thing - https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part040/part040-0022.html https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part040/p... But commonly misquoted. 7kg is a pretty large quantity. It can be up to 150lbs a year if extracted from drinking water (!!).