7 ms·
The issue isn't people's opinion. Was everyone whose privacy was violated saying "that the holocaust did not happen"? And who exactly is the arbiter of what's a
by molbioguy 5y ago
The issue isn't people's opinion. Was everyone whose privacy was violated saying "that the holocaust did not happen"? And who exactly is the arbiter of what's acceptable, if not the law? The issue is that the people who released this data were not law enforcers, they were vigilantes. Maybe some people hold vigilanties in high regard, but I don't. If someone says something you don't like or something you think is inaccurate, reply to it, inform people of what's wrong and convince them of why you believe you are right -- don't trample all over their legal rights. The violations of privacy were indiscriminate and based on the reputation of the company not the individuals -- not that targeting privacy violations would have made things any more legal or acceptable. The loss of expectations to legal privacy are a horrible "poisoning of the well" and eventually hurts everyone.
- belltaco 5y agoLoss of privacy has happened in the past, like with Wikileaks from which Pizzagate originated. >If someone says something you don't like or something you think is inaccurate, reply to it, inform people of what's wrong and convince them of why you believe you are right President Franklin Roosevelt’s secretary of state, Cordell Hull, wrote: "A lie will gallop halfway round the world before the truth has time to pull its breeches on." Fighting misinformation is way harder than spreading it. Because misinformation spreads virally because it's clickbait and interesting, while fact checks are boring.
- molbioguy 5y agoAbandoning rights and freedoms in the name of expediency is also a lot easier than standing up for them. And recovering those rights and freedoms once lost will be a long and miserable process.