2,866 karma · joined September 4, 2010
Dear Google user,
Google received and responded to legal process issued by the United States Department of Justice (<FEDERAL DISTRICT>) compelling the release of information related to your Google account. A court order previously prohibited Google from notifying you of the legal process. We are now permitted to disclose the receipt of the legal process to you. The agency reference number or case number on the legal process is <DISTRICT COURT CASE NUMBER>.
For more information about how Google handles legal process, view our transparency report at http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/userdatarequests/legalprocess/.
Google is not in a position to provide you with legal advice or discuss the substance of the legal process. If you have other questions regarding this matter, you may wish to contact an attorney.
Please reply to this email and/or include the case identification number located in the subject line in any further communications regarding this matter.
Regards,
Legal Investigations Support
Google LLC
--In the case of a Federal Grand Jury subpoena, the Government will request a delayed notification of 1 or 2 years to prevent the service provider (i.e. Google) from notifying you. A subpoena only provides generalized records and not content. So things like billing information, login records, etc.. are fair game. The government is required to obtain a search warrant for actual data (i.e. your emails). Typically, Google will not notify you about executed search warrants against your account.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_Provisional_Authorit...
Sorry, but no, journalists and researchers have implicit bias.
Best case scenario for Rippling: within 6 months the Deel board boots out the CFO & CEO. Shortly thereafter, several people involved on the U.S. side (and potentially their Irish spy) will be indicted for criminal violations of the Economic Espionage Act (notably Rippling has sued Deel for violating the Defend Trade Secrets Act, which provides for civil remedies). In their lawsuit, Rippling has classified their Sales and Marketing Strategy as "trade secrets" which is something that Deel will dispute given that marketing is inherently public. How that plays out criminally is another story, but chances are once the FBI digs into the Deel internal messages, they will find incriminating evidence. 1 or 2 of the Deel executives will plead guilty to conspiracy charges and get 1 year and 1 day. Deel, the corporation entity, will enter into a deferred prosecution agreement.
It's buried in the lawsuit, but Deel is implicated in sending payments overseas to Russia ostensibly in violation of international sanctions. In the Biden administration, this would have definitely interested a US Attorney, but not so much in this administration. Whether it has changed Rippling's strategy vis-à-vis best way to hurt Deel is another story. Perhaps they saw the possibility of Deel not facing punishment or press coverage over the Russia sanctions issue precisely because of the administration change and decided to play their other card: a spy.
Best case scenario for Deel: they covered their tracks internally by using auto-deleting Signal and theres no actual evidence of executives dictating what their alleged spy should be doing. They settle the lawsuit for several million dollars and politely apologize to Parker. Maybe there is a countersuit somewhere? Rippling has pursued this aggressively and confidently which hints that maybe there is some level of projection (i.e. they also had a spy in Deel). As for the criminal charges, if it gets to the point of an indictment of a C-level person, they will have lost, so Deel will need to hope someone low level was involved to pin it on.
This is pretty big! Previously most models could accept massive input tokens but would be restricted to 4096 or 8192 output tokens.
It requires some legwork but they could’ve seen somewhere in the ballpark of 6 figures over 1 year if the exploit wasn’t patched.
Oh, and if they had no ethics.
While I do think Biden was fairly incompetent as a leader, the strategy adopted was probably the best option given the poor circumstances: wait and see if Ukraine could repel the initial invasion, then fund the resistance to draw Russia into a stalemate.
> VB6 only available in 32-bit