I was replying specifically to this:

> This seems like a good example of that being enough metadata to be a big problem

I was not saying it's not a problem that the feds are doing this, because that's not what I was replying to.

You are going to need to clarify more. I have no idea what you are for.

Why does a person have to be "for" something?

[flagged]

	▲	Volundr 13 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		The statement was made to point out that this is an example where a phone number is enough metadata to to problematic for privacy. It stands on its own. It doesn't need more context or purpose.
	▲	rationalist 11 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		"sleaze"?