im just curious how they knew the person of interest read that article?
Was he a person of interest in the lead up to the shootout, who got away, and they were just grasping at straws to discover a list of local area IPs correlated with known addresses he might have been hiding out at so they could obtain a search warrant?
If that's the case, then honestly I don't think this is any worse than when they force say Google or Facebook to provide such data to government.
I don't see why the USA Today should get any special privileges over any other tech company just because they are "media".
If we want to have an argument about the Government abusing it's power to spy on us in general, that's one thing. But the USA Today is literally saying its more important they protect the illusion of their readers "privacy" (which we all know they don't care about your privacy are willing to sell all your personal info to the highest bidder, its in all their TOS) than it is to try and help the cops catch a child predator...
I do agree that this does establish a troubling precedent, but i kinda thought Snowden already made it blatantly clear that the NSA and the CIA is already doing this.
It seems to me that the FBI is basically just trying to play catch up, which we should be concerned about because they are supposedly the agency put in place to police us. Those other agencies are supposedly only supposed to police the world.
(which i never understood why thats supposedly okay. Americans are the only people entitled to their privacy?)
Was he a person of interest in the lead up to the shootout, who got away, and they were just grasping at straws to discover a list of local area IPs correlated with known addresses he might have been hiding out at so they could obtain a search warrant?
If that's the case, then honestly I don't think this is any worse than when they force say Google or Facebook to provide such data to government.
I don't see why the USA Today should get any special privileges over any other tech company just because they are "media".
If we want to have an argument about the Government abusing it's power to spy on us in general, that's one thing. But the USA Today is literally saying its more important they protect the illusion of their readers "privacy" (which we all know they don't care about your privacy are willing to sell all your personal info to the highest bidder, its in all their TOS) than it is to try and help the cops catch a child predator...
I do agree that this does establish a troubling precedent, but i kinda thought Snowden already made it blatantly clear that the NSA and the CIA is already doing this.
It seems to me that the FBI is basically just trying to play catch up, which we should be concerned about because they are supposedly the agency put in place to police us. Those other agencies are supposedly only supposed to police the world.
(which i never understood why thats supposedly okay. Americans are the only people entitled to their privacy?)