It also seems worth noting that (as I imagine you’re aware, and as you partly allude to) Bostrom does outline several types of the sort of infohazards where the knower of the information is whose is harmed, and gives examples. E.g.:
Spoiler hazards (which you give an example of)
“Knowing-too-much hazard: Our possessing some information makes us a potential target or object of dislike.” For example, “In the witch hunts of the Early Modern period in Europe, a woman’s alleged possession of knowledge of the occult or of birth control methods may have put her at increased risk of being accused of witchcraft”
“Commitment hazard: There is a risk that the obtainment of some information will weaken one’s ability credibly to commit to some course of action.”
(There are more, and examples of the types, but I’m just writing this quickly.)
This could suggest that no new label is needed. That said, I can see an argument for some quick way of expressing something broader than any one of those types, but narrower than all infohazards. My nitpick/discussion-prompt is more about what term to use, if we do wish to refer to that concept.
It also seems worth noting that (as I imagine you’re aware, and as you partly allude to) Bostrom does outline several types of the sort of infohazards where the knower of the information is whose is harmed, and gives examples. E.g.:
Spoiler hazards (which you give an example of)
“Knowing-too-much hazard: Our possessing some information makes us a potential target or object of dislike.” For example, “In the witch hunts of the Early Modern period in Europe, a woman’s alleged possession of knowledge of the occult or of birth control methods may have put her at increased risk of being accused of witchcraft”
“Commitment hazard: There is a risk that the obtainment of some information will weaken one’s ability credibly to commit to some course of action.”
(There are more, and examples of the types, but I’m just writing this quickly.)
This could suggest that no new label is needed. That said, I can see an argument for some quick way of expressing something broader than any one of those types, but narrower than all infohazards. My nitpick/discussion-prompt is more about what term to use, if we do wish to refer to that concept.
(Just to be super extra clear, I don’t mean this as at all argumentative or as countering what I see as your main aims.)