It’s just made confusing by the fact that the thief had signed into the victim’s phone, so it makes for a good clickbait story “police got the wrong guy’s data”
If by “when asked” you mean “given a search warrant with very clear evidence that this man had stolen a car”, then… Yes? I’m not sure what you’re trying to prove here.
The ex-boyfriend had signed into the guy’s phone. It’s not like the police just cast a wide net and randomly got his data.
Look I never said I disagree. My point to OP is just please don’t make up shit that straight up isn’t true. Pick a real issue, not some made up paranoia.
Re 1: People keep lumping Google with Amazon and Meta, but Google does not sell your private data and alerts you if it finds out the government to accessed your data. People keep assuming that because the general tech community sells data that Google does it too, but check their privacy policy or just ask anyone who’s worked there. They don’t.
User data at Google is locked up tighter than fort knox. That’s why the Snowden leak was such a huge deal, because the NSA was taking advantage of a security flaw that Google didn’t know it had to scrape user data. Google patched it immediately after they found out.
The government had a warrant, read the article.
It’s just made confusing by the fact that the thief had signed into the victim’s phone, so it makes for a good clickbait story “police got the wrong guy’s data”