this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2023
350 points (98.1% liked)

Selfhosted

40183 readers
769 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] krolden@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The state is just spying via a proxy.

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Do you actually literally believe that (in the context of law), or is that just rhetorical speech?

[–] JeffKerman1999@sopuli.xyz 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] flipht@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

It's literally what's happening.

Texas used the same concept to empower private people to sue abortion providers and receivers under civil law since they couldn't do it criminally.

The country as a whole has done it for a long time with cellphone data, the five eyes alliance, etc.

They have access to information they're barred from getting directly themselves, and they get it from private companies. Spying by proxy.

[–] okamiueru@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If the purpose of collecting the data by private companies is to somehow make money, do you think that sharing this data, or conclusions based on this data, somehow manages to exclude access of governmental agencies? I've never gotten the impression that CIA/NSA would ever willingly play nice.

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This is getting off-track again—

Government agencies paying private companies for your information, or even just asking for it in exchange for something or nothing is legal. That's because nothing was searched unreasonably (because consent was given by the controller of the information) nor was anything seized against the controller's will.

You are not in the picture. The information might be about you but you don't control the information, the car company does. From a legal standpoint, you are irrelevant for the purposes of Amendment 4 protection.

Amendment 4 protects the controller of the information from Government seizure but does not protect the subject of that information. Privacy laws are what are intended to protect the subjects of information. There is some overlap of course. For example, your computer has lots of information about you and what you did in the past. You would be both the subject of the information and the controller (since it's stored on your computer).

Please remember, I am describing what the law is, not what it should be.

[–] krolden@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

If you want to call it that, you can. The State spying by proxy (paying or asking companies for info) is legal and not prohibited by Amendment 4. Amendment 4 does not protect the subjects of information. It protects the controllers of information (which would be the car company).