There's a difference between some individual who publishes something effectively for their extended group of friends, whereupon there happens to be a 'default public' setting ... and for example a wikipedia entry or new organization/periodical posting something for public consumption.

It's a 'social network'.

And I would argue it's very naive to assume that it won't leak further. Of course that's nothing new.

I totally agree it's naive for people to do this stuff!

Fully.

But that people shouldn't be taking advantage of people's naivte, especially for some kind of ostensible 'public good' like 'internet history archive'.

Zero surprises if Visa, FB, the NSA and 'some insurance company' were doing this, for their own selfish reasons, being able to claim 'hey, it's public, so it's legal' type thing ... but I'm not sure that the local librarian should be doing this.

I think sometimes good intentions mean some different things to different people. We HN-er types tend to live a little outside of 'normal' as I'm often reminded every time I visit my parents/siblings homes and am reminded of how normal folks live.