• IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    9 months ago

    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.

    • CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      73
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      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.

      • tsonfeir@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

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

        • glimse@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          27
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

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

          • tsonfeir@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            You’re having trouble finding unpublished information?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.

      • TechNerdWizard42@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 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.

      • umbrella@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Google stopped giving location data recently.

        hahahaahhahahahaahahhahahahahahah

    • Crikeste@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 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?