3 ms·

Independent of the legal nuance being worked out here, it is quite fucked up that the government can just demolish your entire digital infrastructure and then k

Independent of the legal nuance being worked out here, it is quite fucked up that the government can just demolish your entire digital infrastructure and then keep the pieces indefinitely. Imagine if they applied the same standard to your dwelling itself. "Sorry you can't live here for the next few years because a crime might have been committed. Go buy another house. Or not, we don't care".

readthenotes1 2y ago
Maybe you haven't heard of civil forfeiture? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_Unit...
- mindslight 2y ago
  I don't know why you would think that might be a possibility given the venue we are on. Government has also demolished people's actual homes in the course of "crime fighting" and then refused to pay/fix them as well (that notorious case in Colorado comes to mind). But surely you can see there is still a distinction between things that happen infrequently, often with limited scope, or still at least with some semblance of a legal process, and what happens routinely to people accused of "digital crimes". It should go without saying that I think all of these dynamics are terrible, and in dire need of reform. But at least civil forfeiture and "qualified" (née sovereign) immunity are getting talked about, while the totalitarian approach to personal digital infrastructure isn't getting so much attention.
sidewndr46 2y ago
What'd really be a shame is if the police could just show up one day and blow up your house. And then just leave https://www.denverpost.com/2020/03/11/colorado-swat-house-destroyed-supreme-court/ https://www.denverpost.com/2020/03/11/colorado-swat-house-de...
- mindslight 2y ago
  I don't get the point to this reflexive whataboutism. Yes, that dynamic exists and it is bad too. (I referenced that event in a follow up comment, thanks for providing a specific link) And at least that event had some condemnation in the media, as opposed to the routine destruction of digital personal lives escaping criticism even on techdirt.

readthenotes1 2y ago

Maybe you haven't heard of civil forfeiture? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_Unit...

mindslight 2y ago
I don't know why you would think that might be a possibility given the venue we are on. Government has also demolished people's actual homes in the course of "crime fighting" and then refused to pay/fix them as well (that notorious case in Colorado comes to mind). But surely you can see there is still a distinction between things that happen infrequently, often with limited scope, or still at least with some semblance of a legal process, and what happens routinely to people accused of "digital crimes". It should go without saying that I think all of these dynamics are terrible, and in dire need of reform. But at least civil forfeiture and "qualified" (née sovereign) immunity are getting talked about, while the totalitarian approach to personal digital infrastructure isn't getting so much attention.

sidewndr46 2y ago

What'd really be a shame is if the police could just show up one day and blow up your house. And then just leave https://www.denverpost.com/2020/03/11/colorado-swat-house-destroyed-supreme-court/ https://www.denverpost.com/2020/03/11/colorado-swat-house-de...

mindslight 2y ago
I don't get the point to this reflexive whataboutism. Yes, that dynamic exists and it is bad too. (I referenced that event in a follow up comment, thanks for providing a specific link) And at least that event had some condemnation in the media, as opposed to the routine destruction of digital personal lives escaping criticism even on techdirt.