SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Intrepid1 who wrote (14863)4/5/2017 10:24:31 PM
From: neolib  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 356431
 
Are you of the opinion that SI turning over your identity to the SEC was unlawful?



To: Intrepid1 who wrote (14863)4/6/2017 10:18:35 AM
From: Lane3  Respond to of 356431
 
That story explains how exercised you are over "unmasking." I'm sorry that happened to you.

But there is unmasking and then there is unmasking. The kind of internal unmasking based on a simple determination of need to know, a redaction determination, is not the same thing as what you experienced. What happens afterward could be, but the unmasking, itself, is not an issue.



To: Intrepid1 who wrote (14863)4/6/2017 11:15:12 AM
From: bentway  Respond to of 356431
 
You do know that Trump just signed a bill, reversing an Obama directive, that will allow your ISP, which knows every keystroke you make on the internet, to 'unmask' you to whoever pays their asking price?



To: Intrepid1 who wrote (14863)4/6/2017 8:24:14 PM
From: combjelly  Respond to of 356431
 
Yes, I remember there was a boom in Internet stocks way back when. I also remember there was a lot of illegal pumping and dumping going on.

And you got caught up in it. Now, don't get me wrong, I don't think that SI should have released that info. But, due to the Patriot Act, they are required to.

But, again. This isn't unmasking as it is used with Susan Rice.