4 ms·

"I'm scared that I'll end up like the first 300 people who had all of their info dumped on [anonymity network] Tor, with people going through them, reading ever

"I'm scared that I'll end up like the first 300 people who had all of their info dumped on [anonymity network] Tor, with people going through them, reading everything about their lives and abusing their info for identity thefts." Also another good reason for people not to seek mental help, on top of being able to own a gun. And with the recent rush to transition online, I hope this 2018 hack doesn't give the bad guys any ideas.

williamtwild 6y ago
mostlove said: "Also another good reason for people not to seek mental help," Are you actually advocating that people ignore health issues and not seek help because the way you worded you statement it certainly seems so.
- johnchristopher 6y ago
  I read it as "that will scare and preveont people who need it to seek mental help".
  - part1of2 6y ago
    I would prefer to make it more personal, like "Im worried my (or my family's) healthcare information would be used against me, that's why we need strong privacy" or "We can all agree that you wouldnt want your child's counselor's notes on the Internet"
- Retric 6y ago
  There are significant real world negative consequences to seeking mental health. That’s a real problem that needs to be addressed. Unfortunately, there isn’t a good general solution for this stuff. For example, at some point mental illness results in loss of custody for the safety of their children. Getting that right isn’t some easy thing, and mental heath is a common enough problem that people will occasionally get this seriously wrong in both directions.
  - tim333 6y ago
    I'm reminded of the poor Canadian lady who was unable to transit the US to go on a cruise because she'd been treated for depression https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/canadian-woman-refused-u-s-entry-because-of-depression-1.2444960 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/canadian-woman-refuse...
- textgel 6y ago
  A) A large number of people have had their wellbeing put at risk due to placing sensitive information about themselves in a location that was compromised. B) mostlove pointed out that this would give reason not to continue doing this in future. We have two statements here. These two statements when examined closely might have a connection between one another don't you think? Could it be the case that there might be a possible rational connection between them both? That perhaps the consequences of the first might lead to the second? That a rational adult with an IQ in single digits or greater might be able to understand basic cause and effect, and that looking at a certain statement (lets pick a random one and say statement A) might lead to certain conclusions such as (lets pick at random again and pick B). Could it be that a basic understanding of human behaviour (Thing causes damage to human > human avoid thing) could have led to this conclusion being drawn? Or would such a concept require further elaboration and perhaps diagrams to help those unable to grasp it?
heavenlyblue 6y ago
How does owing a gun would help here?
- est31 6y ago
  I think they meant it in the way that if you want to own a gun now or in the future, you shouldn't seek mental health help. And now, as hacks can reveal the data to your employer/school/in laws, there can be discrimination from that angle as well. That was their point I think.
  - faceplanted 6y ago
    It doesn't help, he's saying that losing the ability to own a gun is a disincentive to seeking professional help.
    - kayodelycaon 6y ago
      I don’t know of any mental health diagnosis that can bar someone from owning a gun in the US. Even if you receive inpatient treatment, as long as you went voluntarily, doesn’t change that.
      - srtjstjsj 6y ago
        You could do a simple check to find out what your don't know: https://www.ncsl.org/research/civil-and-criminal-justice/possession-of-a-firearm-by-the-mentally-ill.aspx https://www.ncsl.org/research/civil-and-criminal-justice/pos...
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
    - mmm_grayons 6y ago
      Well yes, having a basic and fundamental liberty restricted without harming others is a tremendous disincentive.
friendlybus 6y ago
Another good reason to not go to Catholic confession or store your cash in the Panama paper's islands or go to a scientology session or store your credit information with equifax. Secrets have to exist somewhere. Socially ostracizing people for leaked mental help information is like laughing at fat people who had their gym treadmill data leaked. That's where you go to solve your problems, data leak or not.
- Memosyne 6y ago
  > Secrets have to exist somewhere This location exists below the cranium or somewhere securely encrypted and private. > Socially ostracizing people for leaked mental help information is like laughing at fat people who had their gym treadmill data leaked And like that example it happens despite whatever ideal moral system we want to espouse (never watched AFHV?). Advising people to not seek mental health care because of social acceptance is a valid concern since the consequences are real and critical. In 1952 Alan Turing admitted to performing homosexual acts and was subsequently charged with gross indecency - he was punished for sharing his secret. What do you think would happen if someone pursued mental health care to resolve a deviance in 2020? "Hello Bob, I'm quite happy you've come to seek help with your problem... but first constable Alice would like to have a word with you. Oh, and I'm afraid you won't be allowed to leave the country or own a firearm; plus I've already spoken to your employer and he "suggests" you take a permanent leave of absence to resolve these issues. No worries Bob, just doing my job! Hm? Your girlfriend and friends dumped you after finding out? That's a shame, Bob." If you want to act like there are no downsides to these solutions then I'm afraid you're being particularly naive. By all means fight for the right to have these people not discriminated against but don't mislead people by suggesting that you've already won the war when you clearly have not. Some lack the fortitude and recruiting them through disingenuous advertising is unethical.
  - friendlybus 6y ago
    Some mental health problems are quite serious. People should own that by taking refuge in the mental health process. There is respect to be had in that path. Are you saying that homosexuality is a mental health topic that Alan was trying to solve earnestly in private? I don't know what to say about legal acceptance of sexual choices and it's not the same thing as earnestly trying to solve a defined mental health issue, which is a legal act. A possible legal outcome for a lot of the behaviours in therapeutic secrets would be more therapy until healed.
jermaustin1 6y ago
> Also another good reason for people not to seek mental help, on top of being able to own a gun. Your feeling is well-founded, as much as you are being downvoted. This is actually a huge topic in the ongoing evolution of digitizing client records in psychotherapy. My wife (a marriage and family therapist) was taught in school that about 20 years ago insurance started requiring a diagnosis to reimburse for treatment, and ongoing treatment plans to be uploaded to their portal to continue reimbursing more than the standard 3-6 sessions most insurers felt was adequate. This cause a HUGE backlash among psychotherapist, because depression would be considered a pre-existing condition, and also if it is on your records, life insurance was nearly impossible to secure, future non-workplace health insurance was hard to get, etc. So everyone started using various "adjustment disorders", or acute grief (I think that's the term they use for loss of a loved one) as an ethical way around marring an otherwise healthy persons permanent record. There are times when it is more ethical to put a real diagnosis, usually so that you can have them referred to a more specialized clinician.

williamtwild 6y ago

mostlove said: "Also another good reason for people not to seek mental help," Are you actually advocating that people ignore health issues and not seek help because the way you worded you statement it certainly seems so.

johnchristopher 6y ago
I read it as "that will scare and preveont people who need it to seek mental help".
- part1of2 6y ago
  I would prefer to make it more personal, like "Im worried my (or my family's) healthcare information would be used against me, that's why we need strong privacy" or "We can all agree that you wouldnt want your child's counselor's notes on the Internet"
Retric 6y ago
There are significant real world negative consequences to seeking mental health. That’s a real problem that needs to be addressed. Unfortunately, there isn’t a good general solution for this stuff. For example, at some point mental illness results in loss of custody for the safety of their children. Getting that right isn’t some easy thing, and mental heath is a common enough problem that people will occasionally get this seriously wrong in both directions.
- tim333 6y ago
  I'm reminded of the poor Canadian lady who was unable to transit the US to go on a cruise because she'd been treated for depression https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/canadian-woman-refused-u-s-entry-because-of-depression-1.2444960 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/canadian-woman-refuse...
textgel 6y ago
A) A large number of people have had their wellbeing put at risk due to placing sensitive information about themselves in a location that was compromised. B) mostlove pointed out that this would give reason not to continue doing this in future. We have two statements here. These two statements when examined closely might have a connection between one another don't you think? Could it be the case that there might be a possible rational connection between them both? That perhaps the consequences of the first might lead to the second? That a rational adult with an IQ in single digits or greater might be able to understand basic cause and effect, and that looking at a certain statement (lets pick a random one and say statement A) might lead to certain conclusions such as (lets pick at random again and pick B). Could it be that a basic understanding of human behaviour (Thing causes damage to human > human avoid thing) could have led to this conclusion being drawn? Or would such a concept require further elaboration and perhaps diagrams to help those unable to grasp it?

heavenlyblue 6y ago

How does owing a gun would help here?

est31 6y ago
I think they meant it in the way that if you want to own a gun now or in the future, you shouldn't seek mental health help. And now, as hacks can reveal the data to your employer/school/in laws, there can be discrimination from that angle as well. That was their point I think.
- faceplanted 6y ago
  It doesn't help, he's saying that losing the ability to own a gun is a disincentive to seeking professional help.
  - kayodelycaon 6y ago
    I don’t know of any mental health diagnosis that can bar someone from owning a gun in the US. Even if you receive inpatient treatment, as long as you went voluntarily, doesn’t change that.
    - srtjstjsj 6y ago
      You could do a simple check to find out what your don't know: https://www.ncsl.org/research/civil-and-criminal-justice/possession-of-a-firearm-by-the-mentally-ill.aspx https://www.ncsl.org/research/civil-and-criminal-justice/pos...
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - mmm_grayons 6y ago
    Well yes, having a basic and fundamental liberty restricted without harming others is a tremendous disincentive.

friendlybus 6y ago

Another good reason to not go to Catholic confession or store your cash in the Panama paper's islands or go to a scientology session or store your credit information with equifax. Secrets have to exist somewhere. Socially ostracizing people for leaked mental help information is like laughing at fat people who had their gym treadmill data leaked. That's where you go to solve your problems, data leak or not.

Memosyne 6y ago
> Secrets have to exist somewhere This location exists below the cranium or somewhere securely encrypted and private. > Socially ostracizing people for leaked mental help information is like laughing at fat people who had their gym treadmill data leaked And like that example it happens despite whatever ideal moral system we want to espouse (never watched AFHV?). Advising people to not seek mental health care because of social acceptance is a valid concern since the consequences are real and critical. In 1952 Alan Turing admitted to performing homosexual acts and was subsequently charged with gross indecency - he was punished for sharing his secret. What do you think would happen if someone pursued mental health care to resolve a deviance in 2020? "Hello Bob, I'm quite happy you've come to seek help with your problem... but first constable Alice would like to have a word with you. Oh, and I'm afraid you won't be allowed to leave the country or own a firearm; plus I've already spoken to your employer and he "suggests" you take a permanent leave of absence to resolve these issues. No worries Bob, just doing my job! Hm? Your girlfriend and friends dumped you after finding out? That's a shame, Bob." If you want to act like there are no downsides to these solutions then I'm afraid you're being particularly naive. By all means fight for the right to have these people not discriminated against but don't mislead people by suggesting that you've already won the war when you clearly have not. Some lack the fortitude and recruiting them through disingenuous advertising is unethical.
- friendlybus 6y ago
  Some mental health problems are quite serious. People should own that by taking refuge in the mental health process. There is respect to be had in that path. Are you saying that homosexuality is a mental health topic that Alan was trying to solve earnestly in private? I don't know what to say about legal acceptance of sexual choices and it's not the same thing as earnestly trying to solve a defined mental health issue, which is a legal act. A possible legal outcome for a lot of the behaviours in therapeutic secrets would be more therapy until healed.

jermaustin1 6y ago

> Also another good reason for people not to seek mental help, on top of being able to own a gun. Your feeling is well-founded, as much as you are being downvoted. This is actually a huge topic in the ongoing evolution of digitizing client records in psychotherapy. My wife (a marriage and family therapist) was taught in school that about 20 years ago insurance started requiring a diagnosis to reimburse for treatment, and ongoing treatment plans to be uploaded to their portal to continue reimbursing more than the standard 3-6 sessions most insurers felt was adequate. This cause a HUGE backlash among psychotherapist, because depression would be considered a pre-existing condition, and also if it is on your records, life insurance was nearly impossible to secure, future non-workplace health insurance was hard to get, etc. So everyone started using various "adjustment disorders", or acute grief (I think that's the term they use for loss of a loved one) as an ethical way around marring an otherwise healthy persons permanent record. There are times when it is more ethical to put a real diagnosis, usually so that you can have them referred to a more specialized clinician.