|
|
|
|
|
|
Jens 'n' Frens |
|
|
|
|
|
Kate Malcolm considers it an invasion of privacy to synthesize public information, because certain information is provided with an expectation that it will be used in a kind of context. I'm not sure I agree with calling this kind of information "public". If I give a piece of information to the government or to my bank on a form for a special purpose, it's not my intent that that be widely disseminated; for the bank or that division of the government to hold onto it, certainly for as long as it's needed for the purpose given, is reasonable to me, but passing it around is not. (The government, for example, gets a notification in the form of a background-check request that someone is buying a firearm; in order that this information serve the purpose for which it is intended, and not others, the government is now at least supposed to get rid of this information after a few months.) |
||
