As used in common speech, whistleblowing also applies to exposing unethical or dangerous behavior, even if it is technically legal.

> Anyone who has worked in tech for any amount of time has signed an NDA.

Just because something is ubiquitous doesn't mean it's ok.

Not that NDAs are always bad, but they should have limited scope, and maybe expirations.

And blanket non-disparagement agreements that prevent employees from ever saying anything bad about their employer are clearly bad.

Merriam Webster defines whistleblowing as:

> one who reveals something covert or who informs against another especially : an employee who brings wrongdoing by an employer or by other employees to the attention of a government or law enforcement agency

Wikipedia further asserts:

> Whistleblowing is the activity of a person, often an employee, revealing information about activity within a private or public organization that is deemed wrongful – whether it be illegal, immoral, illicit, unsafe, unethical, or fraudulent

Arguably, nothing the NSA was doing was illegal. Was Snowden not a whistleblower?

And if something illegal has happened, non-disclosure agreements can't be enforced regarding disclosure of that activity. At least, not in the US.

> Anyone who has worked in tech for any amount of time has signed an NDA. They are not nefarious.

Non-Disclosure agreements to protect a company's legitimate business and trade secrets aren't nefarious.

But I'd argue that Non-Disparagement agreements or non-disparagement clauses that block disclosure of inappropriate personal behavior is, in fact, nefarious.

"Whistleblowing" does refer to disclosing morally bankrupt behavior that isn't technically illegal, and NDAs are nefarious if they cover anything other than trade secrets.

I guess in Epstein country, Sexual Assault is legal now.