Replies

Let's assume, for the moment, that this story is factual and complete. If so, it illustrates one of the (many) problems with comprehensive electronic surveillance, combined with data mining -- False Positives.

If the DHS, FBI, etc. had prior reasonable cause to suspect this couple, and that caused them to check their Google searches -- then, those results might be considered evidence.

However, when you surveil everyone routinely, a large number of apparent hits will occur randomly. (Think of Google search topics as cards -- deal enough of them, and you will have a number of random "hits" of "hot" topics.) Anyone, who has studied (even somewhat) advanced statistics, will understand this problem quite well. Rather than using the data mining to confirm suspects -- they're using data mining to produce suspects. Given that there are probably a lot more people, who happen to search on two or more trigger words, than there are actual active terrorists, at any given time -- you are going to generate more false positives than real hits. A lot of innocent citizens are going to be treated like terrorists; because of this bass-ackwards way of collecting evidence.