Hacker News Reader

Comment by md224 | Hacker News Reader

From the Medium blog post:

> But my son’s reading habits combined with my search for a pressure cooker and my husband’s search for a backpack set off an alarm of sorts at the joint terrorism task force headquarters.

From the Suffolk County PD:

> The former employee’s computer searches took place on this employee’s workplace computer. On that computer, the employee searched the terms “pressure cooker bombs” and “backpacks.”

Still not sure who was searching for what, but it looks like the author's search for "pressure cookers" was a red herring... the actual triggering search was for "pressure cooker bombs." I'm guessing it was probably the author or her husband (whoever "the subject" was) just searching for information after the Boston Marathon bombings. The author should've mentioned that she or her husband searched for "pressure cooker bombs," but I'm willing to assume she either didn't know or forgot that such a search took place.

View on HN

Just FYI: Typing "pressure cooker " into google search autocompletes to "pressure cooker bomb"

Great find! You are correct, it ranks even higher than "pressure cooker recipes" in the Google autocomplete.

Does Google autocomplete usually indicate something is a common search term?

Undoubtedly "pressure cooker recipes" is a common search term used by people who have received a pressure cooker as a gift. But "pressure cooker bomb" seems to be a more common search, is that a reasonable conclusion from the Google autocomplete behavior?

https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/106230?hl=en

Google says "The search queries that you see as part of autocomplete are a reflection of the search activity of all web users and the content of web pages indexed by Google."

So two things. Perhaps there are many more pages dealing with bombs than recipes though. Let's find out.

"pressure cooker recipes" reports "About 6,360,000 results".

"pressure cooker bomb" reports "About 1,720,000 results".

Thus Google believes there are six times as many pages dealing with pressure cooker recipes as there are pages dealing with pressure cooker bombs. Therefore, given that they state that both content and search activity are used to form the autocomplete ranking, searching for "pressure cooker bomb" is a fairly common and unremarkable activity. This is not surprising given that it has been in the news a lot this last year.

Should then searching for common things that many people search for and which are relevant to recent news be considered evidence that one is engaging in terrorist activity and should be investigated and their house search? I would say, no, that is not reasonable.

No, they shouldn't. It's hard to imagine anyone reading your comments or my comments who believes that the police should have been called over these Google searches.

>Does Google autocomplete usually indicate something is a common search term?

Furthermore, Google autocomplete is entirely game-able. /b and or Anonymous have had their way with it on several occasions.

Wow, look at that. As soon as you hit the spacebar, you're a terrorist! That's nuts.

I've conducted all manner of searches on a vast array of questionable subjects. (former military here) I've searched on ricin extraction, homemade thermite, homemade napalm, and more, and I have yet to receive a knock on my door from the authorities. (knock on wood)

This case appears to be a vindictive act by a former employer, rather than a direct result of NSA data interception.

Consider this completely speculative timeline:

9:15 am - employee arrives at work, late again. Employer decides this is the last straw.

10 am - employer meets with employee, tells them their services are no longer needed and to clean out their desk

11 am - employee has packed all personal supplies, but still a little shocked and not quite ready to get up and leave.

11:01 am - employee notices computer is still logged in. Searches "pressure cooker bomb" either accidentally when trying to find "pressure cooker reviews", or intentionally as a result of news story.

11:02 am - IT guy uses remote program, preparing to log employee out and remove credentials. Notices the "pressure cooker bomb" search results, and passes them on to the boss who passes them on to police.

It's certainly possible the employer was being vindictive; it's also possible that the ex-employee entertained the thought of bombing the office. But we have no real reason to conclude either party was actually malicious, only that they were possibly malicious.

If I just fired someone and then found out he was doing searches on pressure cooker bombs, I'd call the cops too.

Conjecture...

Perhaps you've heard of it?

I'll not enter into a hypothetical conversation at this point without evidence to support your suppositions, as it's far too easy to flip your speculations around and spin it into a position which supports my own views while failing to actually address the heart of the matter at hand.

> "Conjecture....I'll not enter into a hypothetical conversation"

Too late! Remember writing this?

> "This case appears to be a vindictive act by a former employer"

I was simply responding to _your_ conjecture with an alternative set of conjecture. My point, which you failed to address, was that neither set of conjecture has been shown to be actual, only possible.

What we actually know is that somebody in the family searched for "pressure cooker bomb" from their former employer's computer, and that the former employer contacted police. We don't know if there was malice on anyone's part. We have no particular reason to suspect involvement by the NSA, the FBI, the KGB, 4chan/b/, or any other group beyond the family, the former employer, and two reasonably local law enforcement agencies.

Well put, regarding my own conjecture.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com