> and when detected and reported, law enforcement came to pick it up, and refused to talk about it.

By "law enforcement", I'd assume the feds and not local. Why not just say which agency? Wouldn't this pretty much be FBI? Why use such a generic term?

▲

embedding-shape 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Because it wasn't in the US, and the specifics don't really matter. All countries I've lived in so far has had similar capabilities for sure, and practiced them too.

▲

dylan604 a day ago | parent [-]

okay fine. s/FBI/whateverAgency/

the point is, this isn't the action of local authorities. this is state level activity. if it is local, that's a level of sophistication and corruption that I have ever been aware.

	▲	r_lee a day ago \| parent [-]
		Just for context in many smaller countries outside the US there isn't that much of a "local" thing like there is in the US, I.e. the national authorities may handle a lot of stuff that may be done by the local authorities in the US

▲

Natfan a day ago | parent | prev [-]

what an incredibly USAmerican-centric comment.

▲

embedding-shape a day ago | parent [-]

That's OK and fair I think, even as a European. HN is fairly US-centric, both submissions, users and comments. I think after more than a decade here, you get to used to everyone assuming you're American and capitalist by default, which given the company who owns HN, kind of makes sense ;)

	▲	DANmode a day ago \| parent [-]
		I like the adjacent conversations just as much, or more. We(?) more or less want this to be a place of general curiosity, perhaps revolving loosely around those things, but not tightly clung to them.