3 ms·
For what its worth - I didnt read the decision because when I started this thread, I was commenting on an NBCNews article. That said, I largely agree with the
by Aloha 13y ago
For what its worth - I didnt read the decision because when I started this thread, I was commenting on an NBCNews article.
That said, I largely agree with the judge - I think I didn't know the full details - I didn't know the government kept historical data for 5 years. Based on the early reports, I presumed they kept the last 90-180 days on hand in an indexed database and if not needed it was aged out. So I made some assumptions of what was going on, and they were much more limited than reality.
- bmelton 13y agoI think that moment has hit all of us at some point. I remember seeing the first of the Snowden documents roll out, and thinking "Well, duh, of course they are." It wasn't until probably months later that I realized how much greater the scope was in reality than even the worst of what I'd assumed... that this[1] had been built, basically, to accommodate all the data they were acquiring... that they had hooks not just into the telcos, but into the ISPs, and into service providers like Google, Facebook, et al.. It wasn't until well later that I realized that, now that the public has heard about this and exclaimed how against it they are, that nothing would be done without fierce political pressure. Also, I'm betting the 5 years is just a target figure, or, more qualified, I bet what they actually mean is "at least" 5 years. Of course, having seen everybody involved with this lie at least once, and brazenly too. This is the first step in making all this go away, or at least paring it back to something reasonable. I'm not comfortable with every communication being tapped that the government just happens to be able to get their hands on. [1] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Data_Center http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Data_Center