WikiLeaks sparked some social media outcry after announcing that it was considering creating an “online database” with Twitter users’ personal information.
“We are thinking of making an online database with all ‘verified’ twitter accounts & their family/job/financial/housing relationships,” the WikiLeaks Task Force said in a tweet.
The social media account linked to WikiLeaks, the organization founded by Julian Assange who has been at the center of the U.S. investigation into alleged Russian hacking of the election, deleted the tweet a few hours later, Forbes reported.
@WLTaskForce @DaleInnis @kevincollier ? pic.twitter.com/KaGj38Z5Nt
— Patrick Tucker (@DefTechPat) January 7, 2017
But not before it set off a flurry of criticism on Twitter for the idea that critics said sounded like a violation of safety and privacy.
@WLTaskForce This doesn’t sound like a good idea. @DaleInnis @kevincollier
— Me (@coryxoxo) January 6, 2017
@WLTaskForce @DaleInnis @kevincollier No. You want NAMES. ADDRESSES. INCOME. HOUSEHOLD RELATIONSHIPS. JOBS.
Why do you want this info?— Justice Jones (@SubversiveGrl) January 6, 2017
WikiLeaks insisted it only planned to share the relationships between verified users based on “proximity graphs,” and cited Wikipedia, Google, LinkedIn and Facebook as examples of other sites that have created similar relationship graphs.
.@kevincollier No it is to develop a metric to understand influence networks based on proximity graphs.
— WikiLeaks Task Force (@WLTaskForce) January 6, 2017
And here’s an example of what @LinkedIn does. Google? Facebook? Same. pic.twitter.com/c0L7HyZW4H
— WikiLeaks Task Force (@WLTaskForce) January 6, 2017
But Twitter users were not convinced.
@WLTaskForce @kevincollier what does that mean?
— eve peyser (@evepeyser) January 6, 2017
@evepeyser @WLTaskForce @kevincollier The level of creepy evil here is insane.
— Mike Drucker (@MikeDrucker) January 6, 2017
@WLTaskForce @kevincollier I thought you just released information and had no accountability for how it is received. Game change???
— Ellie Harvie (@ellieharvie) January 6, 2017
In a series of tweets and replies, the organization attempted to explain and justify its idea.
.@DaleInnis @kevincollier As we stated the idea is to look at the network of *relationships* that influence — not to publish addresses.
— WikiLeaks Task Force (@WLTaskForce) January 6, 2017
@WLTaskForce @DaleInnis @kevincollier But what happens if someone hacks you and puts that all online? I have heard of a group does that.
— Alex Morash (@AlexMorash) January 6, 2017
@WLTaskForce @DaleInnis @kevincollier We don’t trust you. Don’t you get that?
— Julie Harris #Resist (@sabela13) January 6, 2017
@WLTaskForce @kevincollier : “We have all of your information, for relationship analysis, but it’s okay… we won’t release it… probably.”
— Dale Innis ? (@DaleInnis) January 6, 2017
@WLTaskForce @DaleInnis @kevincollier *Cough* bullshit *cough*. People who make a job of leaking things; ” we promise we won’t leak this.”
— E. S. Lynch (@femshmem) January 7, 2017
It also noted that the media was spinning the story incorrectly to make the organization look bad.
Dishonest press reporting our speculative idea for database of account influencing *relationships* with WikiLeaks doxing home addresses.
— WikiLeaks Task Force (@WLTaskForce) January 6, 2017
Finally, the group reached out to ask for “other suggestions.” Twitter users obliged.
We are looking for clear discrete (father/shareholding/party membership) variables that can be put into our AI software. Other suggestions?
— WikiLeaks Task Force (@WLTaskForce) January 6, 2017
Wake up right! Receive our free morning news blast HERE
.@WLTaskForce @kevincollier You need to explain EXACTLY what you have in mind in long-form blog post. Cryptic tweets easily misrepresented.
— Democratise Labour (@democratise_lab) January 6, 2017
@WLTaskForce It’s a totally bad idea. It violates privacy of private citizens. It’s precisely what Americans don’t want. Don’t do it.
— dcpetterson (@dcpetterson) January 7, 2017
@WLTaskForce I think this plan is creepy, I think you’re creepy and I hope someone breaks into your house and rearranges your sofa cushions.
— Ethan Lawrence (@EthanDLawrence) January 6, 2017
@WLTaskForce Stop what you’re doing, go get some tacos, and think about your life choices.
— Adam Rakunas? (@rakdaddy) January 6, 2017
@WLTaskForce pic.twitter.com/Z3QOc5Yam8
— Yung Nick Fury (@GranspearZX) January 6, 2017
@WLTaskForce Then listen to the *loud* concerns about this being creepy and evil. Maybe go find an IRB or something b4 trying a project.
— Zeroth (@ZerothOfTheLaw) January 6, 2017
@ZerothOfTheLaw @WLTaskForce Or just stick to what wikileaks is. A whistleblowing site.
— Dnah Divad (@Dnahdivad) January 6, 2017
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
[email protected]
Originally from New York, Powers graduated from New York University and eventually made her way to sunny South Florida where she has been writing for the BizPacReview team since 2015.
- Minnesota Dems promote bills to ban gas-powered lawnmowers, chainsaws - February 18, 2023
- KJP shows off her contempt for Trump with unnecessary jab during comms director’s sendoff - February 11, 2023
- DOJ ramps up a ‘mere review’ to full-fledged investigation after latest Biden doc discovery - January 12, 2023
Comment
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.
