4 ms·

Yeah, I’m not okay with this. Doxxing is a term with an extremely negative connotation and is often done to people who, bluntly, weren’t hiding or doing anythin

by moomin 6mo ago

Yeah, I’m not okay with this. Doxxing is a term with an extremely negative connotation and is often done to people who, bluntly, weren’t hiding or doing anything wrong. The correct term for the same act here is either “accuse” or “unmask”.

embedding-shape 6mo ago
If someone wasn't previously known, only an alias or alter-ego, but you then link those together with a real-life identity, that's very much the definition of "doxxing", at least the original definition, maybe it's different today? Positive or negative doesn't really matter, just like "shooting" or "jumping" in itself isn't positive or negative, it's just a verb.
- rwmj 6mo ago
  If you want an alias that's fine, just don't use it to do crimes.
- usrusr 6mo ago
  And if the police actually catches the accused and puts them in jail, is that kidnapping? Most verbs have far more semantics than just the most basic before/after state diff.
  - embedding-shape 6mo ago
    Well, no, kidnapping is unlawful abduction. But abduction is always abduction, regardless of who does it, police can abduct people too, but when criminals do so, we call it kidnapping, since it's illegal. Not sure what point you were trying to make, but I think it failed to land properly.
    - mschild 6mo ago
      "Doxing" has negative connotations. Its almost always associated with a private person (ie not police or anyone of a judicial system) releasing personal information with malicious intent. As the person above you said, semantics are important. This is a judicial system specifically searching for a person they believe to have caused severe criminal harm.
      - mulmen 6mo ago
        While I don’t think this case is accurately described as Doxxing I also reject the definition that the state can’t commit Doxxing. The reason this situation doesn’t count is because of due process, not simply state action. The state is not infallible, regardless of what immunity may try to establish.
        mschild 6mo ago
        That's a fair point and I agree with you on both counts. As you said, in this particular case, the respective judicial entities purposefully released the personal information with the intent of arresting both. Whether that is successful or not remains to be seen but that's a different story. For me personally, I understand doxing to be the release of personal information with malicious, indirect intent. For example, hoping that an angry mob will find the home of a person and attack them, send the person death threats through the post, etc. Assuming a decently functional justice system, I don't consider an arrest warrant a malicious intent.
    - butlike 6mo ago
      The point is the outcome and magnitude of "kidnapping" and "abduction" are the same, so it's not fair people are treated differently if the terms are virtually synonymous. The impact is the same. If it was a truly just system, the people in power would subscribe to the same rules they codify into law.
  - KPGv2 6mo ago
    I have, admittedly, only been on the Internet for thirty-five years or so, but I seem to recall that a long time ago reading about people "doxxing" guys who posted pictures of them torturing cats and dogs. "Doxxing" certainly doesn't carry a negative connotation in that usage. Unless you live in a culture where torturing domesticated animals is a good thing. ANd I recall that, before that, hackers would doxx other hackers in the 90s in order to get them arrested. Again, that seems like the exact same usage as here: tying a pseudonym to an IRL for purposes of law enforcement.
    - BurningFrog 6mo ago
      Doxxing a hostile act. If it's negative depends on if you think they deserve the hostility.
      - mikkupikku 6mo ago
        Most people who dox for a reason they think is justified will nonetheless reject the label of doxing for what they did. They'll say "I didn't dox him, I just discovered publicly available but obscure information about him and posted it."
        KPGv2 6mo ago
        > Most people who dox for a reason they think is justified will nonetheless reject the label of doxing for what they did In my experience, plenty people use "doxxing" to refer to their own actions positively. There are even calls to action: "let's doxx him"
    - strbean 6mo ago
      There is still an inherent negative aspect to the "Don't Fuck with Cats" doxxing. Vigilantes publicly revealing the identity of (suspected) perpetrators can enable further vigilante action, and this can cause harm to innocent people if the identification was incorrect, or unwittingly impede law enforcement. And that's before considering whether vigilantism is inherently good or bad. See the canonical example of this going wrong: the Reddit 'investigation' of the Boston Bomber, where someone was misidentified, doxxed, and their family was harassed. Of course, law enforcement is capable of making the same mistakes. But ideally they have better safeguards, and victims of their negligence have much better recourse.
- ffsm8 6mo ago
  [dead]
- landl0rd 6mo ago
  No, if I kidnap someone it's kidnapping. If the police based on probable cause receive and execute a warrant for someone's arrest, it's an arrest. This is how the state monopoly on violence works.
  - mikkupikku 6mo ago
    And if the state kills somebody without the cover of a legal pretext, it's called an "extrajudicial killing" rather than a murder. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extrajudicial_killing#United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extrajudicial_killing#United_S...
    - a2800276 6mo ago
      More to the point, if the police or whoever shoot someone in self defence, that someone is "killed". If I, or the police shoot someone for fun, it's "murder". In both cases the victim is "killed"
      - mikkupikku 6mo ago
        True, self defense isn't called murder. But if the government drone strikes an American citizen without a trial or anything, that's "extrajudicial killing", not murder.
        fwn 6mo ago
        Murder is a universal concept. There are also varying criminal laws that are called murder, but just because these exist, one must not be thrown off track: the moral, pre-legal concept of an act known as murder remains unaffected. 'Extrajudicial killing' is just an apologetic euphemism. An indirect term, since murder is usually considered to be a bad thing.
krono 6mo ago
So it is doxxing if the doxxed committed wrongdoings from the perspective of... the doxxer? Ideals, morality, alignment, goals and purpose are and have always been a static constant for all humankind. There is no pineapple pizza, it is a lie, for I don't like it, and therefore nobody else ever did either.
- vpinkeroff 6mo ago
  You have understand that we're dealing with Morals™, if you're an enemy of the States, anything is on the table. Even some of the things the States is actively calling other countries out for, see Iran for example and how silent the EU, ICC, and NATO is when its "Daddy", as Rutte put it, commits atrocities.
- Barrin92 6mo ago
  doxxing is a term that is commonly reserved for private information that the doxxed individual has an expectation to be treated as such, that is to say, it's not in the public interest. Someone who breaks the law and is actively searched for obviously has no expectation of privacy, or do you think the people visiting Epstein's island were doxxed?
  - krono 6mo ago
    I know, that's exactly the point I'm trying to make. Yesterday I drank a beer out in public - a perfectly legal and culturally/morally acceptable thing to do here in The Netherlands, but deemed wrong to such a degree that it is apparently punishable by death in Iran[1]. I have actively broken Iran's moral stance, societal norms, and laws/jurisprudence against public alcohol consumption from without their jurisdiction, and as being a person unbeholden to their societal norms in any way, shape, or form. Do I obviously now have no expectation of privacy? Is it now okay for these peoples finding themselves to grievously offended by my actions to collect and publish my private data with damaging intent? Is it then doxxing? Am I really a bad person now? Or maybe it depends on the color of your glasses, maybe there exists an entire world outside of ones own cocoon? [1]: https://www.hrw.org/news/2012/06/29/iran-quash-death-sentences-drinking-alcohol https://www.hrw.org/news/2012/06/29/iran-quash-death-sentenc...
pmarreck 6mo ago
So basically it's like Terrorism or Genociding, where if it's against the team you are rooting for, it is that, and if it's not against your in-group it's just War? I'd rather "doxxing" just mean "de-anonymizing" because that's 1) how I already read it, 2) removes the whole "who is the more moral side in this dispute therefore has the right to make the accusation" problem
sixothree 6mo ago
It implies to me they _shouldn't_ be releasing his name. In this case it sounds like they very much should be naming him.
yieldcrv 6mo ago
mod reveal

by moomin 6mo ago

embedding-shape 6mo ago

If someone wasn't previously known, only an alias or alter-ego, but you then link those together with a real-life identity, that's very much the definition of "doxxing", at least the original definition, maybe it's different today? Positive or negative doesn't really matter, just like "shooting" or "jumping" in itself isn't positive or negative, it's just a verb.

rwmj 6mo ago
If you want an alias that's fine, just don't use it to do crimes.
usrusr 6mo ago
And if the police actually catches the accused and puts them in jail, is that kidnapping? Most verbs have far more semantics than just the most basic before/after state diff.
- embedding-shape 6mo ago
  Well, no, kidnapping is unlawful abduction. But abduction is always abduction, regardless of who does it, police can abduct people too, but when criminals do so, we call it kidnapping, since it's illegal. Not sure what point you were trying to make, but I think it failed to land properly.
  - mschild 6mo ago
    "Doxing" has negative connotations. Its almost always associated with a private person (ie not police or anyone of a judicial system) releasing personal information with malicious intent. As the person above you said, semantics are important. This is a judicial system specifically searching for a person they believe to have caused severe criminal harm.
    - mulmen 6mo ago
      While I don’t think this case is accurately described as Doxxing I also reject the definition that the state can’t commit Doxxing. The reason this situation doesn’t count is because of due process, not simply state action. The state is not infallible, regardless of what immunity may try to establish.
      - mschild 6mo ago
        That's a fair point and I agree with you on both counts. As you said, in this particular case, the respective judicial entities purposefully released the personal information with the intent of arresting both. Whether that is successful or not remains to be seen but that's a different story. For me personally, I understand doxing to be the release of personal information with malicious, indirect intent. For example, hoping that an angry mob will find the home of a person and attack them, send the person death threats through the post, etc. Assuming a decently functional justice system, I don't consider an arrest warrant a malicious intent.
  - butlike 6mo ago
    The point is the outcome and magnitude of "kidnapping" and "abduction" are the same, so it's not fair people are treated differently if the terms are virtually synonymous. The impact is the same. If it was a truly just system, the people in power would subscribe to the same rules they codify into law.
- KPGv2 6mo ago
  I have, admittedly, only been on the Internet for thirty-five years or so, but I seem to recall that a long time ago reading about people "doxxing" guys who posted pictures of them torturing cats and dogs. "Doxxing" certainly doesn't carry a negative connotation in that usage. Unless you live in a culture where torturing domesticated animals is a good thing. ANd I recall that, before that, hackers would doxx other hackers in the 90s in order to get them arrested. Again, that seems like the exact same usage as here: tying a pseudonym to an IRL for purposes of law enforcement.
  - BurningFrog 6mo ago
    Doxxing a hostile act. If it's negative depends on if you think they deserve the hostility.
    - mikkupikku 6mo ago
      Most people who dox for a reason they think is justified will nonetheless reject the label of doxing for what they did. They'll say "I didn't dox him, I just discovered publicly available but obscure information about him and posted it."
      - KPGv2 6mo ago
        > Most people who dox for a reason they think is justified will nonetheless reject the label of doxing for what they did In my experience, plenty people use "doxxing" to refer to their own actions positively. There are even calls to action: "let's doxx him"
  - strbean 6mo ago
    There is still an inherent negative aspect to the "Don't Fuck with Cats" doxxing. Vigilantes publicly revealing the identity of (suspected) perpetrators can enable further vigilante action, and this can cause harm to innocent people if the identification was incorrect, or unwittingly impede law enforcement. And that's before considering whether vigilantism is inherently good or bad. See the canonical example of this going wrong: the Reddit 'investigation' of the Boston Bomber, where someone was misidentified, doxxed, and their family was harassed. Of course, law enforcement is capable of making the same mistakes. But ideally they have better safeguards, and victims of their negligence have much better recourse.
ffsm8 6mo ago
[dead]
landl0rd 6mo ago
No, if I kidnap someone it's kidnapping. If the police based on probable cause receive and execute a warrant for someone's arrest, it's an arrest. This is how the state monopoly on violence works.
- mikkupikku 6mo ago
  And if the state kills somebody without the cover of a legal pretext, it's called an "extrajudicial killing" rather than a murder. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extrajudicial_killing#United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extrajudicial_killing#United_S...
  - a2800276 6mo ago
    More to the point, if the police or whoever shoot someone in self defence, that someone is "killed". If I, or the police shoot someone for fun, it's "murder". In both cases the victim is "killed"
    - mikkupikku 6mo ago
      True, self defense isn't called murder. But if the government drone strikes an American citizen without a trial or anything, that's "extrajudicial killing", not murder.
      - fwn 6mo ago
        Murder is a universal concept. There are also varying criminal laws that are called murder, but just because these exist, one must not be thrown off track: the moral, pre-legal concept of an act known as murder remains unaffected. 'Extrajudicial killing' is just an apologetic euphemism. An indirect term, since murder is usually considered to be a bad thing.

krono 6mo ago

So it is doxxing if the doxxed committed wrongdoings from the perspective of... the doxxer? Ideals, morality, alignment, goals and purpose are and have always been a static constant for all humankind. There is no pineapple pizza, it is a lie, for I don't like it, and therefore nobody else ever did either.

vpinkeroff 6mo ago
You have understand that we're dealing with Morals™, if you're an enemy of the States, anything is on the table. Even some of the things the States is actively calling other countries out for, see Iran for example and how silent the EU, ICC, and NATO is when its "Daddy", as Rutte put it, commits atrocities.
Barrin92 6mo ago
doxxing is a term that is commonly reserved for private information that the doxxed individual has an expectation to be treated as such, that is to say, it's not in the public interest. Someone who breaks the law and is actively searched for obviously has no expectation of privacy, or do you think the people visiting Epstein's island were doxxed?
- krono 6mo ago
  I know, that's exactly the point I'm trying to make. Yesterday I drank a beer out in public - a perfectly legal and culturally/morally acceptable thing to do here in The Netherlands, but deemed wrong to such a degree that it is apparently punishable by death in Iran[1]. I have actively broken Iran's moral stance, societal norms, and laws/jurisprudence against public alcohol consumption from without their jurisdiction, and as being a person unbeholden to their societal norms in any way, shape, or form. Do I obviously now have no expectation of privacy? Is it now okay for these peoples finding themselves to grievously offended by my actions to collect and publish my private data with damaging intent? Is it then doxxing? Am I really a bad person now? Or maybe it depends on the color of your glasses, maybe there exists an entire world outside of ones own cocoon? [1]: https://www.hrw.org/news/2012/06/29/iran-quash-death-sentences-drinking-alcohol https://www.hrw.org/news/2012/06/29/iran-quash-death-sentenc...

pmarreck 6mo ago

So basically it's like Terrorism or Genociding, where if it's against the team you are rooting for, it is that, and if it's not against your in-group it's just War? I'd rather "doxxing" just mean "de-anonymizing" because that's 1) how I already read it, 2) removes the whole "who is the more moral side in this dispute therefore has the right to make the accusation" problem

sixothree 6mo ago

It implies to me they _shouldn't_ be releasing his name. In this case it sounds like they very much should be naming him.

yieldcrv 6mo ago

mod reveal