> The organization planned right from its launch in 2013 to make data available, and set things up that way - getting the OK from texters to use some of their i

> The organization planned right from its launch in 2013 to make data available, and set things up that way - getting the OK from texters to use some of their information while protecting their privacy. I question how they obtained approval: * Is it some sort of click-wrap EULA? A person is considering suicide, and they are preseted with a EULA to read, which they must consent to in order to get help?! * Is it opt-in after the crisis is over? I would be surprised if the response or opt-in rate was very high * Is it opt-out? Is that appropriate for what are the most private thoughts one can imagine? Wouldn't many people feel violated to know those thoughts are retained and now objects of research? It would be too bad if their anonymization algorithm failed to catch something; I hope they do more than strip metadata. Is anything at all sacred and too private for our mass surveillance society?