Pretty sure that’s what the “telling you of it” part fixes. Alice is the person who told you of Alice’s hazards, so your knowledge is exclusively caused by Alice, and Alice is the person whose model dictates whether you can share them.
yep, if that’s OP’s suggestion then I endorse the policy. (But I think it’d be covered by the more general policy of “Don’t share information someone tells you if they wouldn’t want you to”.) But my impression is that OP is suggesting the stronger policy I described?
Okay, mea culpa. You can state the policy clearly like this:
”Suppose that, if you hadn’t been told X by someone who thinks X is exfohazardous, then you wouldn’t have known X before time t. Then you are obligated to not tell anyone X before time t.”
Pretty sure that’s what the “telling you of it” part fixes. Alice is the person who told you of Alice’s hazards, so your knowledge is exclusively caused by Alice, and Alice is the person whose model dictates whether you can share them.
yep, if that’s OP’s suggestion then I endorse the policy. (But I think it’d be covered by the more general policy of “Don’t share information someone tells you if they wouldn’t want you to”.) But my impression is that OP is suggesting the stronger policy I described?
No, Tamsin’s interpretation is correct.
Natural language is prone to ambiguous interpretations, and I’d tried to rephrase the summary a few times to avoid them. Didn’t spot that one.
Okay, mea culpa. You can state the policy clearly like this:
”Suppose that, if you hadn’t been told X by someone who thinks X is exfohazardous, then you wouldn’t have known X before time t. Then you are obligated to not tell anyone X before time t.”