4 ms·
This is correct - but I’d rather my law enforcement had a pre-existing reason to investigate me rather than just stumbling upon something in random hidden searc
by cpressland 2y ago
This is correct - but I’d rather my law enforcement had a pre-existing reason to investigate me rather than just stumbling upon something in random hidden searches. Innocent until proven guilty is key here.
I have nothing to hide, but I’m still not giving you access to my photo library.
- Braxton1980 2y ago[flagged]
- willk 2y agoBecause they can.
- Braxton1980 2y agoSo they randomly picked a person to search?
- reaperducer 2y agoNever been across an international border?
- yreg 2y agoSpeaking of which, iOS needs to finally support user accounts, ideally hidden ones as well.
- ethagnawl 2y agoThey have a jealous ex who is a LEO.
- bdamm 2y agoYou seem to think that the indexing and searching happens only if there is a reason. Why do you think that? There are all kinds of cases where government agents were found to have abused access to data for reasons that had nothing to do with illegal or immoral behavior by a target.
- bloqs 2y agoIrritatingly naive
- paxys 2y agoWhether the data is encrypted or not, they still need a warrant.
- KennyBlanken 2y agoThose warrants are secret. We don't even know if they're following the rules they lay out. In the US, the secret FISA court hasn't turned down a single warrant. Either the government is only coming to them with completely justified cases or they're just a rubber stamp. Either way, there's no oversight so we have no way of knowing.
- account42 2y agoFor now. Once the means are there it's only a matter of time until everything is scanned automatically.