Comment on Google Will Stop Telling Law Enforcement Which Users Were Near a Crime

glowie@h4x0r.host ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

• oDDmON@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  I doubt operational bottlenecks were the issue, more likely the rising volume of requests made Google reassess the policy.

  LEOs already press the boundaries of the permissible, and as much as I hate giving props to the big G, good on Google for taking the initiative.

  source

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Cops only investigate people they think are guilty, and despite being objectively terrible at their jobs, they have ridiculous amounts of self confidence.

    So to them, if they suspect someone of a crime, they can “bend” any rules for stuff like this because “the suspect is clearly guilty anyways, we just don’t have proof”.

    source
  • odelik@lemmy.today ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Wouldn’t the inability to process the volume of request from LEOs be an apt example of an operational bottleneck?

    source

    • oDDmON@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      The article didn’t state that Google had problems responding to LE requests.

      Also, Google can have as much capacity as God, whenever they decide to put their will to something.

      They also consume data like mortals consume chips, and one bar chart would be all it took for them to address a potential bottleneck, and rising liability, by finally eliminating it.

      source
• helenslunch@feddit.nl ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Surely this came down to business and not alturism.

  These are not necessarily mutually exclusive ideals.

  From time to time businesses will do things that actually benefit their customers in order to keep their business.

  source
• topinambour_rex@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Or self preservation.

  source