• Kairos@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    2 days ago

    Whatever that top number may be, it’s very readable I just don’t wanna right now.

    • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      2 days ago

      Which is precisely my point - if I were so motivated, I could suss that out. Or do a partial/fragmentary OCR match on valid addresses in Ohio that align with possible zip code matches and narrow it down to a relatively small potential target set of addresses and individuals.

      • floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        To target some random dude that received a silly prescription? Why go through all the effort when you could just pick a random residential address?

        • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 day ago

          It’s not about motivation. It’s about “is it feasibly possible to actually identify a person from this partially-obscured PHI”. But also, who the fuck knows if they’re going to care about enforcing PHI and HIPAA laws now 🫠