this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2024
191 points (95.7% liked)

Technology

59271 readers
4059 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
191
If you watched certain YouTube videos, investigators demanded your data from Google (mashable.com)
submitted 7 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
16 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 26 points 7 months ago

Once upon a time, FBI tracked everyone who read certain books from the library. This was illegal and against the spirit of the fourth amendment to the Constitution of the United States (this was before the PATRIOT act and countless SCOTUS carve-outs since). But they did it anyways, and invented parallel constructions to how they detected the guys they wanted.

For now, because you add on a computer or on the internet makes it a new instance, it's still legal for them to do dragnet surveillance.

But then the people are the enemy of the justice system and government institutions, which should tell you something.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 7 months ago

Welcome back to Disturbed Reality, in Mexico...

[–] [email protected] 50 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Ok, so the headline is a bit clickbait-y. It's not not everyone who ever watched the video that they are interested in, it's one person they are trying to track down. Still concerning from a privacy standpoint, but it's not like they are trying to say that watching the video was itself a crime.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Is anyone asking the question of: Why do they need 30,000 accounts to try and determine if 1 watched the video? What the fuck kinda investigation is that?

Why would being able to prove this one person watched one video mean anything?

And is that evidence worth violating the privacy of 30,000 people? How could it be?

[–] [email protected] 110 points 7 months ago (5 children)

Thats not the issue.

Its the same as when feds ask google for location data for everyone near a crime at a given timestamp. Its violating innocent peoples privacy in large swathes.

Google stopped giving location data recently. Hope they keep going.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

The other comments are justifiably suspicious, but I think what they said they stopped doing was uploading the location data to the cloud. You can only check your history on the device itself rather than the web interface.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

stopped giving location data recently

Probably so they can start selling it instead

[–] [email protected] 8 points 7 months ago

Google stopped giving location data recently.

hahahaahhahahahaahahhahahahahahah

[–] [email protected] 11 points 7 months ago

Exactly. Nobody should be ok with random data being given out "just in case". This should be illegal and never happen. But it is perfectly acceptable in today's subpoena world and that's a scary thing.

The agent could have done the same thing in many different ways to get an ip address. It's also concerning that agents are still using IP address as a vouch of identity in 2024.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 7 months ago (2 children)

They never stopped. They said they would stop and then they just kept going. Google is not a trustworthy company.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Not doubting you, but do you have a source? Im just having trouble finding what you describe

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You’re having trouble finding unpublished information?

I think google’s—and all corporations—history of saying one thing to cool off the press, and then doing another thing is proof enough.

The fact that they ever gave it is proof enough. They’re just trying to save face.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

A long time ago, between the time when the oceans drank Atlantis, and the rise of the sons of Aryas, Google had a business model where it'd keep all the private data and no-one would get to look directly at it. Then some technicians stocked their exes. Then courts required them to cooperate with police warrants. For a while Google advertised they had a legal team to resist all warrants, and make sure they were absolutely positively legal with all the ducks in order, but then they stopped not being evil. So here we are.

That is to say, Google tried, but then it enshittified.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

Enshittification is the unfortunate fate of most publicly traded companies.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 7 months ago (1 children)

"We are going to stop doing [action]" is megacorp lingo for "We are going to stop telling you that we do [action]"

[–] [email protected] 15 points 7 months ago

~~Don't~~ be evil.