Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
You're asking more than one question, really:
Should you have the expectation of privacy in "private" electronic communication?
–and–
Should "private" communications that become public be considered when vetting people for positions of influence?
Personally, I was raised with the understanding that you should never write anything down that you wouldn't want read aloud in front of your grandma and the Supreme Court. The law (at least in the US) does delineate some type of communication that should have the expectation of legal privacy: with your priest, your therapist, your lawyer, and your spouse. A lesser expectation for when you're in your own home, and none at all beyond that. Whether the law is right or wrong, it at least sets expectations. And those YRs were not protected. They perhaps have grounds to sue whoever leaked the group chat, but you can't really cry foul at anyone else.
That's a fair statement, I guess it does really boil down to those two questions. The main one in my eyes being the first though. In today's world with the technology we have, moral or not, is it reasonable to expect privacy in written forms of communication.
I'm a hacker of the old school. The only privacy you truly have is what you wrest for yourself through robust cryptography, and even that is temporary.
Scary times
It has always been thus. I just read a story –here on fedi!– about a centuries-old letter finally getting decrypted.