How many careers have ended over discovery of parallel construction?
Sir, parallel construction ever happening has nothing to do with what we're talking about, how the legal system enforces its decisions without assigning a cop to each American, and then a cop to watch that cop, and then a cop to watch that cop, and then a cop to watch the cop.
The only way this isn't a lazy quip is if you're a full on "abolish the legal system" anarchist or a full on "with the correct DAG of cops we will finally enforce laws on each other"
> parallel construction ever happening has nothing to do with what we're talking about
I never said the two cases have anything to do with each other.
What I see is similarities between the two regarding your reasoning. That is, they both require the government agents doing something that you'd think would jeopardize their careers, and yet they're getting away with it all the time... because they actually do manage to successfully hide the practice from the courts when trial time comes.
If just reading "parallel construction" is inducing a knee-jerk reaction from you, look at other examples of perjury and how many careers ended over them. Here [1] is one article I'll quote for you: A former San Francisco Police commissioner [said] "One of the dirty little not-so-secret secrets of the criminal justice system is undercover narcotics officers intentionally lying under oath. [...] It is the routine way of doing business in courtrooms everywhere in America." ... Justice [...] of the State Supreme Court in Brooklyn condemned a widespread culture of lying and corruption in the department’s drug enforcement units: “I thought I was not naïve [...] but even this court was shocked, not only by the seeming pervasive scope of misconduct but even more distressingly by the seeming casualness by which such conduct is employed.”
If you're going to claim the "engineers" here are "lazy" or otherwise ignorant about the robustness of the US legal system, you'll need to do more to enlighten them than wave your hands around saying "it's hard to spell out why it's impractical" with vague game-theoretical explanations. Because to a lot of folks here, this kind of stuff is clearly still happening, regardless of what you believe about the difficulty of distributed coordination or the explanatory power of game theory.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/03/opinion/sunday/why-police...
If you're saying you're legitimately confused as to how legal rulings ever matter given they can still theoretically be violated, well, like I said, either a pedant or an anarchist, either way, a lazy college stoner thought masquerading as a response, and I am more than welcome to label it such, you can eschew the faux outrage. This is a discussion forum, not a dinner party, and it's not about you, it's about your weak attempt at a riposte. I do that too! And I'm also an engineer!
I'm just trying to guess a gap: engineers tend to see law as more iron, like code, and judge law based on inverse programming: if you can find some set of circumstances that creates a gap where the law isn't obeyed.
Ex. here, you might mean that this doesn't technically stop police from requesting geofenced data anyway, using it to get suspects, then not mentioning it at trial. Yes, technically, the police could ignore this, and request a warrant, then the judge could ignore it, then the tech companies could ignore it, the DA could collude with the police to hide that happened, and pretend they found the suspect a different way.
But it's impractical.
It's hard to spell out why, exactly, tl;dr: death penalty for your career if any of this is discovered by anyone, you can't do it by yourself, and these people are generally on the same team in our distanced analysis, people are tribal, and gov't attorneys/tech companies/judges/police can't rely on eachother's silence.