News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site by MichaelGG on Saturday July 23, 2016 @03:46AM (#12148748)
Citation? Nothing there says Google worked with the government. In fact, the article has Google saying the opposite. The slides just say "direct access" with no clarification.

Can you point me to exactly what you're reading that indicates Google worked with the NSA ?

Re:Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site by colordrops on Saturday July 23, 2016 @04:17AM (#12148798)
You're joking right? This was national news when this was revealed.

You obviously didn't read the link: "The PRISM program collects stored internet communications based on demands made to internet companies such as Google Inc. under Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 to turn over any data that match court-approved search terms."

Re:Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site by emmelaich on Saturday July 23, 2016 @07:54AM (#12149215)
Obeying the law is not "working with"
Re:Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site by colordrops on Saturday July 23, 2016 @11:51AM (#12149813)
The previous accusation was that Google was hacked and unaware that PRISM was collecting data, which is what I was referring to. Please read the thread before commenting.
Re:Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site by MichaelGG on Saturday July 23, 2016 @02:02PM (#12150349)
OK well in that case every person/company in the country "works with" the USG since they comply with some laws/demands.
Re:Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site by colordrops on Saturday July 23, 2016 @02:17PM (#12150416)
Google initially denied that they complied with the usage of PRISM, until documentation showed they were lying. Apple held out longer than Google, so at some point they all had to decide that they were going to "work" with the USG.
Re:Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site by MichaelGG on Saturday July 23, 2016 @04:25PM (#12150880)
Please give me an exact citation. Perhaps update Wikipedia while you're at it?
Re:Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site by colordrops on Saturday July 23, 2016 @05:09PM (#12151013)
I've never edited wikipedia, but my understanding is that it is labor intensive. I'll just provide a citation here:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/19/us-tech-giants...

Re:Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site by emmelaich on Sunday July 24, 2016 @08:17AM (#12153119)
The words "mandatory" and "compulsory" figure prominently in that article.
Re:Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site by colordrops on Saturday July 23, 2016 @04:34AM (#12148828)
Anyone care to elaborate why I'm being downvoted?
Re:Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site by tombrossman on Saturday July 23, 2016 @05:21AM (#12148924)
I didn't downvote you but if you read the comments guidelines[0] they are helpful and cover some of the comments you made above.

As an aside, your profile says you signed up 1337 days ago and your karma is at 1358. Another 21 down-votes and your Hacker News profile page will looking pretty leet - I say go for it. Remember, it's just fake internet points, you can't spend them or do anything interesting with them.

[0]https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re:Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site by jrockway on Saturday July 23, 2016 @07:51AM (#12149210)
On Reddit you can actually sell your Internet Points. Apparently spammers like to get high-karma accounts for spamming purposes.