Comment: Re:Check your lifetime maximum (Score 1) 651
Comment: Beginning of the end for KDE? (Score 2, Insightful) 356
Comment: Re:Unjust laws (Score 1) 728
Comment: Re:Why use utility poles at all? (Score 3, Informative) 153
Comment: Re:Geothermal heat pumps (Score 3, Informative) 62
Comment: What happens after though (Score 1) 62
Comment: Re:Age old debate (Score 1) 847
In that case you should probably argue for a data escrow service to be set up independent of the Government (although true independence would probably be impossible there could be a lot of oversight).
An independent escrow service would mean that if there is any suspicion the data can't be (as easily) destroyed. As for who's suspicion: anybody could raise questions but before this type of somewhat sensitive information is released the alegation would be reviewed by an independent body.
There is certainly still scope for corruption but there always will be. All we can do is raise the bar high enough that most people can't be bothered to try and jump it and it's the classic case of diminishing returns.
It's also far to easy to see evil lurking around every corner when in actual fact I think most people are generally honest and will do the right thing left to their own devices. There are occasional pockets of corruption and they seem to glow like a cancer but, like a cancer it would probably be better to surgically remove just those elements than put in place a system that polices everyone as if they were a criminal.
Comment: Re:Age old debate (Score 1) 847
Re-read the second line of my post. I specifically state that I don't think she has done anything wrong but I feel she has acted in an irresponsible manner by aggregating and making easily available this information.
What she has done is lower the barrier to revenge attacks on these officers and her families. I would be pretty annoyed if I was one of those officers.
Comment: Re:Age old debate (Score 2) 847
I think you have badly missed my point. I completely agree that Government needs to be transparent that doesn't mean I agree that we need to make the home address of everyone that works for the Government publicly available.
I'm sure a lot of the information on this womans blog is information that is important that the people have access to such as how much is being spent on drug enforcement and how many people are working in drug enforcement. I don't see the public has any right to know where the individual oficers live.
There is an interesting grey area in the article though: the posting of the movements of the officers. Normally I would say that this is not information that should be in the public domain as there are obvious security risks associated with it. However, the information should be obtainable if there is a suspision of foul play.