Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

To use an analogy (probably flawed): Any stranger can walk up to my house, break out a window, and steal things from within. This is obviously illegal.

By your analogy... because "anyone" could do this, law enforcement should be able to as well?

Now s/house/computer/



view as:

Just as it would be obviously illegal for a stranger, it would be obviously illegal for law enforcement.

I'm confused as to how you could misconstrue that.


I was responding to this:

> Observation by anyone/everyone is so easy and natural. We should not expect more privacy from law enforcement than we would from any other stranger.

I disagree. I expect law enforcement to pass a more stringent bar -- ie. get a warrant. The same is true for privacy and data collection (IMO). Just because "anyone" can see and record my activities does not mean law enforcement should be permitted to without a warrant that very narrowly defines the duration and start time. (Ie. No mass surveillance.)


The police do not need a warrant to observe you for a short time with standard, widely available technology. If that were not true, the police could not patrol.

Public -vs- private spaces. Big difference, and super relevant to privacy. The contents of my electronic systems were never public.

Legal | privacy