4 ms·
"At least they're only doing it for public figures it seems" Public figures are those we elect and put in government service, at least that was the original in
by lightedman 10y ago
"At least they're only doing it for public figures it seems"
Public figures are those we elect and put in government service, at least that was the original intended definition. Seems we've drifted from that definition into a rather dystopian one, with Assange.
- marcoperaza 10y ago>Public figures are those we elect and put in government service The courts disagree with you on that point, also including celebrities, business leaders, athletes, etc. Position in government is only one avenue by which people exercise power or achieve fame.
- bitJericho 10y agoHopefully they start tracking judges and prosecutors too, since they are the group arguably failing the public the most.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- marcoperaza 10y agoWell I sure hope they don't. Legal or not, this is not a direction I'm eager to see our society go. It's basically mass doxxing.
- maxt 10y agoExpensive mass doxing if you follow the proper procedures for doxing, like feeding names into Axciom[1] [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acxiom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acxiom
- notahacker 10y agoPersonally I think judges and prosecutors do a better job when their principal concern is the law, and not the recent publication of information on the home addresses of members of their extended family who don't have a security detail. YMMV.