He is probably trying to take down the flight-tracking bot (https://www.protocol.com/elon-musk-flight-tracker). Funny how he talks about Free speech on twitter while actively trying to take down a twitter account.
Anything is possible, but this doesn't make a whole lot of sense given that it would have cost him just $50K to do it rather than the price to purchase 9.2% of Twitter.
> Funny how he talks about Free speech on twitter while actively trying to take down a twitter account.
"Actively trying to take down a twitter account" is a hallucination at this time.
[0] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-03-13/when-elon...
[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2016/02/03/elon-musk-personally-cancels...
[2] https://www.businessinsider.in/thelife/news/elon-musk-ruthle...
This might be a good opportunity to advertise ADS-B data collection: websites like flightradar24, flightaware, adsbexchange are powered by thousands of volunteers that collect and upload ADS-B radio transmissions broadcasted by aircraft. Most of the collection goes through an RTL-SDR dongle, so if you have a raspberry pi or some other machine that's up 24/7 - consider contributing! Minimal radio kit for signal reception (RTL-SDR+simple antenna) costs somewhere around USD50. It's also a good entry point for learning SDR and radio in general.
> Q: I live in XYZ, can you use another feeder there? Where can I see if you need more coverage in my area? Etc.
> A: The answer is simple. If you live on planet earth, yes, ADSBexchange.com could use a feeder at your location. The map may look like you see aircraft in your area, but the truth is you can’t see what you can’t see. To detect aircraft with MLAT, we need a minimum of 4 feeders to receive data and the more receivers see it the better the MLAT accuracy. If an aircraft is low altitude, feeders may have to be within a few miles.
I would also add what each individual site will not say explicitly: with a little bit of Linux configuration skills it's easy to upload to multiple aggregators at once.
But this thread is about location: ADS-B (dependent broadcast) and to a lesser degree MLAT (secondary radar interrogation response), both of which primarily operate on 1090MHz.
With an unmodified RTL-SDR you can receive both, not at the same time and you'll want to swap antennas since the ranges are so different, but still :).
PS. The RTL-SDRs used for ADS-B often feature a modification: an analog filter centered at 1090MHz, which removes all other data but makes the 1090MHz reception better. You shouldn't have the filter if you want to play around on other frequencies with the same device.
That way nobody would know he was aboard.
I do not believe you are correct on the designation for a commercial flight if the president were on board. There is 'Executive One' if he flies on a US civil aircraft, but that is still federally owned.
> On December 26, 1973, to "set an example for the rest of the nation during the current energy crisis" and to "demonstrate his confidence in the airlines", then-President Richard Nixon became the only sitting president to travel on a regularly scheduled commercial airline flight when he flew on a United Airlines DC-10 from Washington Dulles International Airport to Los Angeles International Airport.[2] A Nixon aide carried a suitcase-sized secure communication device on board the plane, so that the President could remain in contact with Washington in the event of an emergency.
Fun anecdote: friend of mine's dad is a ~billionaire, and not only does he still fly commercial, he flies coach. And has family come pick him up from the airport. Epic tightwad. Never spends money unnecessarily. To his credit, he also works at the local soup kitchen once every week like clockwork. How he does that while maintaining a 90 hour a week schedule, I have no idea.
I also have a billionaire friend who only flies coach. Personally I think he’s a moron for doing so, but respect that he’s so cheap. You generally keep your wealth by being cheap, but realistically business versus coach won’t fundamentally change anything. It’s more the principal.
We're talking about the richest guy on the planet. Of course he's not like everyone else.
Posting your bank account statement on Twitter is not free speech.
If saying anything wasn't a problem we wouldn't even think of the concept of free speech.
Twitter is not free speech platform and that is okay.
The 1A (roughly speaking) limits the scope of the Government as not too limit free speech.
Twitter, as a private company, is not restricted by the first amendment. However, one can note that Twitter does not allow free speech.
This is quite important from a legal standpoint, because since Twitter practices censorship of ideas they don’t like, they are no longer considered a common carrier.
There are huge legal ramifications of this!
Free speech is a very well defined concept, as done by literally hundreds of political science scholars. The fact that the US Constitution applies it only to the Government does not mean it cannot be discussed in a different context. For instance I would like new regulations to extend free speech outside the scope of the First Amendment. This is an extremely well defined politica stance.
You seem to agree that Twitter is NOT a common carrier, and then it must be treated as an editor. This would imply that they are responsible for the tweet they decide to publish.
These are exactly the far-reaching legal ramifications of free speech (outside Government) that I was mentioning.
People can discuss things that are not law.
One can point out, for instance, that Twitter is not a free speech platform, and this is bad for many reasons.
One can comment on laws, proposing to extend legal protections to different sectors.
I hope your conversations are not solely based on current law, that must be pretty boring.
(You interpretation of Section 230 is shaky at least)
Edit: Note - I am not blaming you for the communication breakdown, it seems that perhaps we were both coming at this from different sides and may have missed each others points. Either way, wish you all the best.
A better example would be: a Twitter account reports your position when you are in a public space every five minutes, including pictures of you at the bar, jogging, on a date at a restaurant, etc…
All of these are public informations, but the way they are aggregated amounts to stalking in my opinion.
I admit this is very borderline, tough!
The fact that the information is public is not a perfect defense, by combining public information, clearly associating it to an individual, and publishing this to a large audience, you can create a sizable threat.
I'm really disappointed in the way the HN crowd seems utterly unable to see beyond "it's free speech!" when it comes to situations like this.
I understand the argument that this could be used to show potentially dubious behaviour, but that could already be shown from the flight records if it occurred without publishing live details of every single flight. That's simply not necessary.
That may still not outweigh the privacy concerns.
[0]: https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/steve-jobs-car-apple-ceo-l...
If he is the majority shareholder, and still has apparently free time for another venture, maybe he probably should start there, instead of his own peeves with Twitter.
Honestly, was a bit disturbed by some of the photographic evidence I have seen today.