There are times when I do want to let everyone know where I am and who I am. This allows others to avoid running their vehicle into mine and improve rescue efforts if I'm in danger. So I think these sorts of digital beacons and aggregators can be a great improvement to support that mission.
If the nav beacon is mandated for safety reasons, I do not think that I should be required to give my personal information if I choose not to, and if there is a navigational concern, I don't think I should give more information than I need to to enable safe navigation. I think it's enough to provide telemetry (e.g. there is a boat, plane, car or drone at location x, y, and z).
I personally believe that people should own their data and forcing people to give more information than required to accomplish the task (e.g. navigation) is a problem for me. DJI's position is closer to what I'd prefer to see in this case.
Tracking aircraft simply is not the same as tracking, say, all my neighbors.
Many in this community get awfully nervous about things like police surveillance of cars, license plate tracking, etc. The Police say they need it just for special cases like crime, but we all know the dangers of dragnet surveillance. This is also dragnet surveillance; it's the same violation of privacy if the mode of transportation is different. Many on this forum think it's fun though because the mechanism is a bit nerdy and they aren't the ones being surveilled.
It's a bit like having a box in your car which automatically alerts the authorities every time you exceed the speed limit.
This is sousveillance, not surveillance.
You'd be surprised how many middle and upper middle class americans fly.
As you can see the same argument can be applied to any form of mass surveillance.
There are likely to be other information sources that are out there in the open. I assume there's extensive paper trail, starting from the point someone decides to purchase aircraft, to aircraft maintenance. And even more if they want to pilot themselves.
Even without zero technology there are plane spotters, although they will likely not be interesting in every Cessna 172 that flies by.
None of this is very surprising though. The aircraft industry thrives on transparency. Which is a good thing for safety.
Note that you'll be tracking the aircraft, not who is flying it. For instance, we know that Elon Musks' aircraft tail number is N628TS (btw - N, or November, also tells us it's from the US). I just did a quick google search for it. So now you can track it. Whether or not there's anyone else other than the pilot is another matter entirely.
If you want privacy, owning an aircraft is not the way to go. Renting or chartering one might be better against casual observers, but there is still a paper trail. You may be able to add some more levels of indirection.
That said, you are correct that there is a slippery slope. For aircraft, the above is understandable, as you are dealing with human lives, including on the ground. However, now the FAA wants to add even more strict requirements for _drone_ operators(even recreational), including broadcasting your own position at all times while operating a drone. At least one can argue that you are safe while flying an aircraft, no such thing if you are on the ground. https://www.thedroneu.com/blog/faa-announces-drone-remote-id...
But that paper trail cannot be accessed through ADSB. If you charter a plane, there's no way someone can deduct who you are via ADS-B signals alone. And agencies with access to the paper trail don't need ADS-B to know where you went.
I totally get this, but don’t think in terms of good and bad. Think in terms of power (empowerment and disempowerment).
I know how powerful mass surveillance is. I know how powerful knowledge is.
Therefore it isn’t surprising in the slightest that I should want to tear down every last shred of privacy in service of my own intelligence (empower my future self). Simultaneously I advocate to protect my own privacy (disempower future enemies).
It’s totally reasonable for anyone to want privacy. It’s also totally reasonable for me (or the Kremlin, or NSA) to want to thoroughly dismantle yours.
You're thinking of Page, Brin, Zuckerberg, Bezos? Yeah.
This is just basic safety for vehicles that can't see each other traveling at 100-1000 miles per hour in conflicting space.
Although it's a little concerning that ADS-B makes it so much easier to identify WHO is flying the planes.
Tracking others is okay for me but not for thee.
I'm only saying this partly in jest but I think it is conceivable that this line of defense is used by these communities and is absurd.
I do agree with you: a basic level of privacy should be there for everyone from (almost) everyone. In this particular case ATC should track aircraft and ensure that not everyone is going in any airspace willy-nilly.
It fundementally comes down to information asymmetry, which is only growing. Any step that makes public knowledge available, especially when focused on areas predominantly used by the economically, socially or politically dominant classes help push back against this growing information asymmetry.
At least under our (Finnish) legislation capturing and distributing this information might be illegal. Law says you may not disclose captured radio transmissons unless they were ment for public use or you were the intended recipient.