|
|
|
|
|
|
by jdonahue
4918 days ago
|
|
|
From a 'security' perspective, this seems like an objectively good thing to me. If having this data publicly available is a good thing, then this map is a good thing - the more exposure, the better. If it's a bad thing, then the higher exposure resulting from this makes it more likely that a change in policy will happen. The status quo (prior to the publication of this map) was that the information is publicly available but only a few people were aware of it. I can't imagine any argument for that being the optimal situation. |
|
|
You can have something which is worse than the status quo even when the status quo is not optimal. In particular, exacerbating a problem in the hope that it spurs people to address it is only a positive if it spurs people to address it. If not, you've only enlarged the scope of the problem.