Hacker News Reader

Comment by tablespoon | Hacker News Reader

> In the not so distant future the government will have have a database with everyone's dna. It's just not possible to keep something secret that you literally shed everywhere you go.

There's an important difference between physically being able to keep something secret, and legally being able to keep something secret.

For instance: today the government has the physical ability to break into my house and shoot me in the head for no reason at all, but they don't have the legal ability to do so. Likewise, they have the physical ability to illegally obtain evidence, but not the legal ability to use that evidence to convict someone at trial.

View on HN

Glad you highlighted "today", because tomorrow is much different as supreme court and FBI become more politicized. Rules seem to change on a whim. Or as in Canada gov't can declare an emergency an seize protester bank accounts. Another thing to point out is "today" should be in "today in some countries". Russian oil executives are mysteriously falling out of windows and boats all of the sudden.

I mean ever heard of fred hampton? That one blew up publicity-wise and is fairly famous now but there's no reason to think it was the only relatively recent example or that they've ever stopped doing things like that.

The rules aren't meaningless but they also don't stop the government from assassinating you if they decide that works out best for them.

> today the government has the physical ability to break into my house and shoot me in the head for no reason at all, but they don't have the legal ability to do so.

Isn't that exactly what they did to Breonna Taylor in Louisville? Haven't seen anyone arrested for that.

Technically the police did have a warrant and legally executed it. Sure the recent scuttlebutt is that the warrant was created from falsified data, but at the time it was legal.

So then the original poster was wrong?

Not just scuttlebutt. One of the detectives has already pled guilty.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/23/us/breonna-taylor-ex-officer-...

> Haven't seen anyone arrested for that.

Now you have:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62427546:

> Breonna Taylor: US police charged over shooting death

> Four US police officers have been arrested and charged over the fatal shooting of Breonna Taylor.

That happened a month an a half ago.

Only once the feds stepped in, though.

> Only once the feds stepped in, though.

What's that got to do with the actual point here, which is privacy that's infeasible through purely physical means can be implemented through legal means?

As an aside, tech people can be annoying black and white sometimes, and do things like misinterpret imperfect solutions as literally no solution at all. DNA is not going to be protected by all the buzzwords we use to describe encryption systems, but that doesn't mean it can't be protected.

No, I saw that a month and a half ago. From the article: "The federal indictment announced by Attorney General Merrick Garland accuses the four of civil rights offences, unlawful conspiracy, unconstitutional use of force and obstruction."

None of them have been charged with breaking into her house or shooting her.

> None of them have been charged with breaking into her house or shooting her.

You're missing the point.

No, I think you are. They are finding other ways to charge these people, they are specifically not being arrested for murdering someone. Breonna Taylor isn't an isolated case, but it's finally one where they're trying to get some kind of justice through charging these people with something. They don't actually believe they'd get a conviction with charging them with murder, so while it might not be legal in theory, it is in practice.

Not at all accurate. During the Obama administration the groundwork was laid for the extrajudicial execution of American citizens

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/23/us-justificati...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Abdulrahman_al-Awla...

Anyone deemed to be "part of the forces of an enemy" may be targeted.

Hasn't this always been the case? I assume if you were after a foreign general and there are some American mercenaries in the same building well "I guess they're out of luck"; still gonna bomb the complex.

Historically the case for American's citizens has been a capture or kill doctrine. It's fine if in the midst of a capture, they happen to be killed.

Now the government has the explicit authority to kill citizens.

Technically they can do it legally. Few years back in Kansas City (iirc), some guy was basically prank calling the police on a gamer, but got the wrong house, police just knocked on the door. No weapon. Killed some the dad, and walked. No repercussions at all for the police. The prank caller got like 5-10 I think, as he should. But there's something wrong when somebody dies by cop and they are unarmed and don't serve time.

>> For instance: today the government has the physical ability to break into my house and shoot me in the head for no reason at all, but they don't have the legal ability to do so.

> Technically they can do it legally. Few years back in Kansas City (iirc), some guy was basically prank calling the police on a gamer, but got the wrong house, police just knocked on the door. No weapon. Killed some the dad, and walked. No repercussions at all for the police. The prank caller got like 5-10 I think, as he should. But there's something wrong when somebody dies by cop and they are unarmed and don't serve time.

It sounds like that was a mistake on the part of police. I was not talking about "SWATings gone wrong" or anything like that. I was talking about deliberately killing someone just because you can.

I believe you are talking about swatting [0]. Framing this as a prank call is a bad way to describe it because it trivializes the attack. Based on your whole comment, I assume that wasn't your intention though.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Wichita_swatting

I agree, but when it's this difficult to physically kept it secret, then someone will collect it. That someone will then tell the police in return for some favor and the police will cook up some parallel construction. The result is the same except more corrupt and expensive.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com