Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Downwinder

(12,869 posts)

8. There is no expectation of privacy because the

Reply to n2doc (Original post)

Thu Jun 30, 2016, 12:41 PM

Jun 2016

Government can see through walls.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

35 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Home Computers Connected to the Internet Aren't Private, Court Rules [View all] n2doc Jun 2016 OP

... Faux pas Jun 2016 #1

This message was self-deleted by its author rjsquirrel Jun 2016 #2

so does this also apply to wall st, banks, corps, and government computers tk2kewl Jun 2016 #3

wow SoLeftIAmRight Jul 2016 #32

That includes the judges home computer too. Rex Jun 2016 #4

The FBI had actually obtained warrants in this case struggle4progress Jun 2016 #5

It's hard to defend pedophiles whatthehey Jun 2016 #6

If law enforcement sees evidence of a crime being committed can't they enter without a warrant? Kablooie Jun 2016 #7

I agree. They followed users of a pedophile web site back to their home computers. Nitram Jun 2016 #16

Here is the legal equivalent, in my opinion. Meldread Jul 2016 #28

Yes. Seems obvious to me that they would need a warrant to search each suspect. Kablooie Jul 2016 #34

Yes, and this is what complicates the FBI's case. Meldread Jul 2016 #35

There is no expectation of privacy because the Downwinder Jun 2016 #8

That is the truth. Rex Jun 2016 #14

I guess it's not breaking and entering if I can pick the door lock, either. Orrex Jun 2016 #9

If homeowners expected security, they wouldn't connect their door to the outside world. . . Journeyman Jun 2016 #10

It's more like you break into a house and sell stolen goods out of it snooper2 Jun 2016 #12

Sigh. The ruling says no such thing FBaggins Jun 2016 #11

By extension, cameras and microphones on said computers... nt Xipe Totec Jun 2016 #13

What a ridiculous premise Scalded Nun Jun 2016 #15

by that standard, are our homes fair game because they could possibly be robbed? 0rganism Jun 2016 #17

I have security in place. MohRokTah Jun 2016 #18

With the slight difference that... jberryhill Jul 2016 #27

Wouldn't that mean that hacking is legal? surrealAmerican Jun 2016 #19

This is a good example of people in power showing their technological ignorance. Odin2005 Jul 2016 #21

I can't tell if this is technological illiteracy or just plain stupidity. Odin2005 Jul 2016 #20

This has to be one of the stupidest legal arguments Xipe Totec Jul 2016 #22

What exactly sarisataka Jul 2016 #23

Well I guess Snowden can come home now. Meldread Jul 2016 #24

I'm painting my bathroom windows black. rug Jul 2016 #25

so i guess having a front door means there is no privacy into a house? MariaThinks Jul 2016 #26

if you have a door or a driveway, you knowingly and willingly risk burglars in your home 0rganism Jul 2016 #31

This is stupid on its face, a car can be broken into that doesn't mean that its open to the world uponit7771 Jul 2016 #29

Poppy Bush appointed AntiBank Jul 2016 #30

While the reasoning might raise concern, the FBI's methods look OK to me muriel_volestrangler Jul 2016 #33