Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> I think where this is sticking for me is the whole "consent" issue. I have a very difficult time believing that all the accused companies have voluntarily consented - without coercion - to NSA taps.

Duress is not coextensive with coercion. Consent can be valid even if it involves leverage (e.g. no government contracts for you unless you consent).

> Regarding the language itself, the 4th says you have the right to be secure in your papers (personal data!) and effects (personal property) against search and seizure, not just the sanctity of your home and person.

4th amendment interpretation does make the logical analog between "papers" and "files" or "data." But information that you've given over to others (e.g. files stored in your Drop Box) or information that was not even generated by you (e.g. server logs, call data records) is not your "personal data" whether it's ink on papyrus or bits.

What's tripping you up is the illusion of "network transparency." You might think of your gdrive as the same as your hard drive, but of course it's not. The difference between the two is nothing less than keeping information about your finances in your desk (where the 4th amendment protects it), and keeping that information in your accountant's office (where the 4th amendment does not protect it).




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: