General Discussion

Meldread

(4,213 posts)

24. Well I guess Snowden can come home now.

Sat Jul 2, 2016, 12:50 PM

Jul 2016

After all, leaks of government information happen all the time, and they are happening more frequently now than ever. By sharing its information with Edward Snowden, the government had no reasonable expectation of privacy since it was sharing the information.

You know, it's just like connecting your driveway to the street. Once you do that, your home is no longer private. You have effectively opened up your home to the entire world. Then, not only did you connect your driveway to the street, you connected your door to the outside, allowing people to get in! You even laid down a "Welcome" mat outside your front door, giving them permission!

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