Hacker News Reader

I'd say when you twig to google as a violent terrorist it should escalate to a real human to check before shutting the account down and forwarding it to the FBI.

View on HN

And in the meantime before a human can check it, you think google will be completely without liability if they flag someone as a terrorist but let them continue on with their business, even aiding them with all of google services?

They most certainly should be, because an automated Google system having "flagged" a user as "a terrorist" means nothing in the eyes of the law. On the other hand, they should not in any way be without liability for wrongly suspending a user's account just because their automated system unjustifiably "flagged" them.

>they should not in any way be without liability for wrongly suspending a user's account just because their automated system unjustifiably "flagged" them.

A legal team of 1,000+ at google is betting that you're wrong. I have a feeling they came to a pretty logical decision that liability of aiding someone flagged of terrorist activity is greater than liability of shutting down someone to whom you owe nothing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com