Thing is, the linked-to noyb piece doesn't even characterize the Guardian article correctly. This piece says: "a “Guardian” report about rival gangs using data

Thing is, the linked-to noyb piece doesn't even characterize the Guardian article correctly. This piece says: "a “Guardian” report about rival gangs using data brokers to learn the geographical location of their opponents to carry out attacks". The Guardian piece says "reports at the time said it could have been a neighbour related to a gang member." That's the location of the relative of their opponents. And "could have" indicates uncertainty. Has the investigation since then determined why the bombing took place, and if a data broker or public data was at all relevant? The Guardian piece only conjectures, yet noyb seems to think it's a solid foundation. This makes me distrust noyb's ability to support their position - making a mountain out of a molehill. For that matter, how did the bombers know that gang leader had a relative, and that relative's name? Is one's family tree information also public in Sweden, or did the bombers know it from some other means? Like, did the gang members grow up together before joining different gangs, so knew each others' extended family? In that case, public access to the data would be irrelevant.