2 ms·

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 "

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 7mo ago
If you want an alias that's fine, just don't use it to do crimes.
usrusr 7mo 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 7mo 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 7mo 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 7mo 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 7mo 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 7mo 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 7mo 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 7mo ago
    Doxxing a hostile act. If it's negative depends on if you think they deserve the hostility.
    - mikkupikku 7mo 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 7mo 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 7mo 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 7mo ago
[dead]
landl0rd 7mo 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 7mo 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 7mo 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 7mo 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 7mo 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.

rwmj 7mo ago

If you want an alias that's fine, just don't use it to do crimes.

usrusr 7mo 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 7mo 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 7mo 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 7mo 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 7mo 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 7mo 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 7mo 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 7mo ago
  Doxxing a hostile act. If it's negative depends on if you think they deserve the hostility.
  - mikkupikku 7mo 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 7mo 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 7mo 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 7mo ago

[dead]

landl0rd 7mo 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 7mo 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 7mo 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 7mo 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 7mo 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.