4 ms·

> was a capital crime > track down witnesses Am I too naive that I think that's a worthy use of that information?

quest88 2y ago
I'd agree that is a good case. But I'd still object to this tracking. It's a slippery slope. Who determines what is worthy? We might like one government administration and highly expect them to respect the privacy. But what about the next administration? We've just seen Trump say he will withhold funding for universities with "illegal protests". I'd fully expect his administration to abuse this tracking, in the name of law and order.
- andrepd 2y ago
  > It's a slippery slope. Who determines what is worthy? Who determines if a wiretap is worthy? Or a search and seizure? Or a simple arrest? We have an answer for this, it's called Law and an independent judiciary.
  - quest88 2y ago
    You're right in theory but history shows us it's not black and white and rarely has an effect after the fact.
Cu3PO42 2y ago
It probably was. It was also illegal. As much as you, I, or even public opinion may agree that something is right, we can't have public servants knowingly violate the law when it is convenient. To accept that would be to forfeit many of your liberties.
andrewinardeer 2y ago
In my state the law said that this checking information could only be used for contact tracing. So when the law says this and the cops drive over it in in a bulldozer, it's a bit shit. That said, in my state the cops recruited and flipped a criminal lawyer who then back doored her high profile clients and gave confidential and privileged information to them them in order to build cases.
int_19h 2y ago
When these apps were rolled out, they were specifically advertised as private and only used for contact tracking and nothing more on the basis that we as a society want to maximize their use for tracking to be effective. Reneging on this promise will backfire in any future pandemic.

I'd agree that is a good case. But I'd still object to this tracking. It's a slippery slope. Who determines what is worthy? We might like one government administration and highly expect them to respect the privacy. But what about the next administration? We've just seen Trump say he will withhold funding for universities with "illegal protests". I'd fully expect his administration to abuse this tracking, in the name of law and order.

andrepd 2y ago
> It's a slippery slope. Who determines what is worthy? Who determines if a wiretap is worthy? Or a search and seizure? Or a simple arrest? We have an answer for this, it's called Law and an independent judiciary.
- quest88 2y ago
  You're right in theory but history shows us it's not black and white and rarely has an effect after the fact.

Cu3PO42 2y ago

It probably was. It was also illegal. As much as you, I, or even public opinion may agree that something is right, we can't have public servants knowingly violate the law when it is convenient. To accept that would be to forfeit many of your liberties.

andrewinardeer 2y ago

In my state the law said that this checking information could only be used for contact tracing. So when the law says this and the cops drive over it in in a bulldozer, it's a bit shit. That said, in my state the cops recruited and flipped a criminal lawyer who then back doored her high profile clients and gave confidential and privileged information to them them in order to build cases.

int_19h 2y ago

When these apps were rolled out, they were specifically advertised as private and only used for contact tracking and nothing more on the basis that we as a society want to maximize their use for tracking to be effective. Reneging on this promise will backfire in any future pandemic.