Watch a Youtube Video and Get on a Fed List

[Ben]

This is disconcerting. They don't mention which fed agency did this, but from what I gathered in the limited story: Feds were going after a crypto trader. For some reason, in order to track people dealing with him, the feds (for some reason not made clear in the article) sent youtube links to videos on drone mapping tutorials. Anyone who watched the tutorials had all their personal data handed over to the feds. Or at least the request was made. The article didn't have info on if Google complied.

The lack of an obvious connection between the crypto money laundering and tutorial videos on drone mapping is what set my alarms off. Especially this example for me. Given that I worked with UAVs in the old job, I watch videos like the ones in the article all the time. The fact that I could get swept up in some fed investigation for innocently watching a video on something that's not a crime is frightening. It makes me wonder if the next time I watch a video on how to change the hydro oil in my tractor that I end up as part of a domestic terrorist investigation.

This happened a year ago, BTW.

https://mashable.com/article/google-ordered-to-hand-over-viewer-data-privacy-concerns
https://www.engadget.com/authorities-reportedly-ordered-google-to-reveal-the-identities-of-some-youtube-videos-viewers-140018019.html

The original Forbes article is behind a paywall.

[Ben]

Steve Lehto comments:

https://youtu.be/i8jMSs8du-o

[gunsmith]

 everyone who comments on this thread will be .... uh oh.

[cordex]

I wonder how long until being on a government list for a special investigation is so common that they start looking into the few people not on government lists as potential “gray man” threats.

[Ben]

On a related note:

https://www.foxnews.com/us/fbi-interrogates-americans-over-social-media-posts-every-day-all-day-long-agent-says

[Hawkmoon]

On a related note:

https://www.foxnews.com/us/fbi-interrogates-americans-over-social-media-posts-every-day-all-day-long-agent-says

The part I found most interesting was that the agents refused to show their badges. I wonder if they refused to show them at all, or if they refused to show them "on camera."

[bedlamite]

[dogmush]

The part I found most interesting was that the agents refused to show their badges. I wonder if they refused to show them at all, or if they refused to show them "on camera."

It is SOP for Fed Law enforcement not to allow their credentials to be videoed or photographed.  They claim it is to make counterfeiting harder.

[230RN]

It is SOP for Fed Law enforcement not to allow their credentials to be videoed or photographed.  They claim it is to make counterfeiting harder.

Sounds good when the goobermink says it fast.

But if nobody's seen a photo of one and can't know what one looks like, it wouldn't be hard to flange up a fake one --or two, since they appear to work in pairs.  Who would know their "credentials" were fake?  Just gussie them up with officialese and pic and go do your dirty work.

Look up how to spot fake IDs(there are lots of hits on that) and don't do any of the "tells" in those articles.

The whole idea of random data mining is reprehensible to me.

Once again I cite Ayn Rand's comments on lawbreakers:

https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/319903-did-you-really-think-we-want-those-laws-observed-said

Terry, 230RN

....Overheard in a small cubicle in a big building somewhere in Utah...  "Hey, I think we've got 'im this time!  He just referenced Ayn Rand!  Let's get 'im !"

[dogmush]

That's why I said "they claim" for the reason.  I suspect for 85% of the general public you could photoshop up some credentials that look like Mulder and Scully's off the intro to the X-Files and it would pass just fine.  (that's not what they look like, FWIW)

It may just be bureaucratic BS too.  I know we are told not to allow photos or copies of out DOD CAC cards to be taken for the same reason, but it's not like a counterfeiter couldn't find one online in two secs.  But the rule is there, and I've seen people punished for breaking it.

[230RN]

I took pains to note the goobermink said that, not you.

I suspect that 85% is a low estimate.

Heh. I remember some TV private eye had some kind of press in his car so he could print any business card he needed to go interview someone.

Terry, 230RN

[K Frame]

I'm already on so many Fed lists that another one isn't going to make a lick of difference.

[230RN]

And so are your contacts.

....Overheard in a small cubicle in a big building somewhere in Utah...  "Hey, I think we've got 'im this time!  He just responded to K Frame!  Let's get 'im !"

[WLJ]

Doubt I've done anything to get on any lists.
I'll be right back, there's someone knocking on the door.

[dogmush]

I'm already on so many Fed lists that another one isn't going to make a lick of difference.

-Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, probably

You never know which one is going to be one too far.  Have you folks seen the video's of FBI knocking on doors over FB posts?

[K Frame]

"Have you folks seen the video's of FBI knocking on doors over FB posts?"

No, I won't watch those.

I'm afraid of getting on a list.

[Ben]

-Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, probably

I recommend The Gulag Archipelago to people all the time. Kind of hard to get through, but valuable reading, especially in these times.

I'm slogging through all six volumes of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire just now, and sometimes I wonder if I'll get to the end before the decline and fall of the United States (or too late already, maybe).

[230RN]

FWIW:

https://www.engadget.com/authorities-reportedly-ordered-google-to-reveal-the-identities-of-some-youtube-videos-viewers-140018019.html