Hacker News Reader

Comment by bko | Hacker News Reader

As somewhat of an aside, I think ElonsJet should be allowed to exist but I also think its a terrible thing to do and harassment. Do you not have a right to privacy if you're wealthy? Could I start tracking and broadcasting the whereabouts of someone in my office? How about [unpopular politician]? It's weird that people celebrate this invasion of privacy. He's still a human being.

This was crystalized for me when I came across an article detailing what they found from dumpster diving through Mark Zuckerberg's garbage. I mean, really?

https://www.inc.com/bill-murphy-jr/a-professional-trash-pick...

View on HN

> Do you not have a right to privacy if you're wealthy?

Honestly? Maybe not. He's the richest person in the world, and as such he's incredibly influential (and unelected). It's absolutely in the public's interest to know what he's using all that money and influence on, in a way that isn't relevant for your average median-earning Joe Schmoe. Once you get that rich you become more influential than a senator, and senators certainly don't have a right to privacy for their constituents to not know what they're up to.

On the private jet front, airplanes don't have privacy, necessarily so, because you need to know where they all are at all times to prevent collisions, protect airspaces, etc. So if you don't want people to know where you're traveling, don't use an airplane that has a 1-to-1 correspondence to you.

Time to bust out the unlicensed jetpack and really blur the Elon Musk/Tony Stark lines.

I believe privacy is a right. Rights have to granted equally otherwise they're not rights. If you cross a certain threshold and lose your rights then they are not rights. And if rights can be granted and removed arbitrarily without due process then they're certainly not rights.

Do you believe privacy is a right?

This is an absolutist argument. In the real world lines have to drawn somewhere all the time.

I do not believe the location and flight paths of your private jet being kept private is a right. Its transponder is also publicly broadcast whenever active, and any receiver in range on ground or in space can receive and retransmit its broadcasted payload.

I’d subscribe to an SMS or email feed of @ElonsJet if it was deplatformed. Higher level, I try to get any info available on Twitter in my email instead; it’s just a shitty message bus for my purposes.

It's an interesting conundrum. As someone who believes in rights, the problem here seems to be neither with elon's expectation of privacy nor with elonsjet's expectation of free speech, but in the requirement of having to report his plane's ADS-B realtime output to a public system.

It doesn't seem impractical that the government needs that data to operate effectively, but to require that a person (or plane) broadcast their information to a registry that is public seems to be the crux of the issue here.

It's not only the government that needs that data, it's other pilots. These transponders are used to prevent in-air collisions between planes. That's not a centralized system; it's peer-to-peer. Your plane has antennas that are directly receiving these signals and ensuring that no other plane is too close, or on a collision course. These signals are also read by ground-based antennas for similar purposes (and also by avgeeks who want to collate the data, e.g.: https://www.flightradar24.com/add-coverage ).

The system fundamentally doesn't work if you try to make it non-public. The end result might end up being more privacy for Elon's jet, sure, but also way more mid-air collisions, as it would no longer be able to serve its function of letting a plane tell other planes where it is.

A very good point that embarrassingly highlights my lack of knowledge about it. Thank you for the correction.

I suppose a decent, easy system for evading its tracking would just be for rich people to swap keys to their private jets. Or chartering. Or flying commercial. Etc.

"I believe privacy is a right."

I guess you don't believe free speech is a right since you don't think people should be able to speak about Musk's travel location?

"If you cross a certain threshold and lose your rights then they are not rights."

People cross thresholds and lose rights all the time. We put them in a right-less place called jail. I guess you think nobody has rights then?

I think the common wisdom is that your rights end where another person's begin.

Human rights were invented to protect the weak against abuses from the strong (who would otherwise always get their way because in nature might always makes right).

I think it's a bit of a pointless concern to think about the equal privacy rights of a man who's worth hundreds of billions of dollars.

If the strong don't have human rights too, then the strong will obviously dispense with any pretext of valuing the premise of human rights in the first place.

Ah, but who decides the cut-off line between strong and weak?

Privacy isn't a right because it can't be enforced. Should I be able to sue someone for taking photos of me walking to the grocery store? Should other people be able to sue me for reading a newspaper over their shoulder? No, that kind of litigation is insane. There is no such idea as a "reasonable expectation of privacy" when you own a multimillion dollar private jet. You're being taxied through airports on one of the largest vehicles mankind can make, of course you're not going to be private. There's no basis for enforcing that kind of right, it would quickly devolve into a game of "who can buy the better lawyer", which certainly doesn't balance the scales of justice.

The whole "privacy is a human right" shtick is a virtue-signally scam. Privacy is your duty, nobody will give it to you for free. Complaining that the rest of the world won't ignore you after writing a Tweet that 500 thousand people liked is absurd. Musk had his chance to live a private life. He threw it away, and now he lives the consequences. Defending some multi-billionaire because he can't have his cake and eat it too is just ridiculous. I say that as someone with neutral feelings towards Musk overall.

I'm sympathetic, but some aspects of privacy are absolutely rights (and should continue to be). In the US, for example, HIPAA restricts health care providers from wanton dissemination of your private health information. This applies to Elon Musk as much as anyone else. I'm happy enough considering that a human right, inasmuch as similar laws don't apply to my dogs' veterinary records.

Or consider someone pointing binoculars into our window from a a high vantage point so that he can watch my partner undress. If privacy is "our duty", should we be required to use closed blackout curtains on all windows at all times, or else it should legally be our own fault for being watched? My vitamin D is already low enough.

I absolutely agree that you give up certain aspects of privacy when you accept the privilege of being extremely wealthy. No argument from me there. But I still think Musk should enjoy the right of showering without someone selling uncensored photos of the event.

>Do you believe privacy is a right?

From a legal perspective, this depends on the country you're in. In the US where Musk lives things like Article 8 do not apply. Also, public figures in general are considered differently under various legal tests than private figures.

Hum... It would be a great point if it was about people tracking him giving money to politicians, buying communication platforms, ads spending, or even random investments.

But tracking where he goes on vacation is really not relevant.

(Yes, the point about airplanes not having privacy stands, so the kid is obviously on the clear. It's just not a worthy social service.)

> unelected

True, and he has also not passed a single law or regulation.

Rachel Maddow is also unelected, and likely has more influence than Musk does. Oprah also had tremendous influence, though she seems to have stepped away from the limelight recently.

Posting his airplane's position on twitter has nothing to do with aviation safety and everything to do with doxxing and harassment.

> True, and he has also not passed a single law or regulation.

Actually, that's not true: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/09/elon-musk-tesla-spacex-spend...

It is true, because lobbying is not passing a law or regulation.

In fact, a large corporation must make political contributions, otherwise they'll be targeted by the politicians (as Microsoft discovered in the 90's.) Large corporations are expected to pay tribute.

That's such a revisionist look at history. I don't know how anyone can be educated about the matter and think somehow that Corporations are at the whim of politicians, and not the other way around.

Microsoft overreached significantly and the US government 30 years ago gave them a slap on the wrist.

> Corporations are at the whim of politicians, and not the other way around.

Corporations are creatures of law and exist and are structured solely at the discretion of government, except to the extent government delegates power to other entities.

So, yes, they are at the whim of politicians.

Politicians may be at the whim of the haut bourgeoisie as a class, and those are the same class of people who the joint stock corporation as a form disproportionately serves, but there aren't the same thing as corporations.

Thats information that is publicly available anyway - it's just that the presentation is nicer. ElonsJet can be replicated by anyone.

And it should be if the original get's banned. Just waiting to get Nunes Cow back!

Your license plate, address, and employer is likely publicly available. Doesn't mean I should broadcast it out.

When you are moving in the public sphere - as Musk is doing - you lose certain rights to privacy that nobody John 'Random Person' Smith enjoys.

So it would be okay to you to list the home address, movement and acquaintances of senators, congressmen, judges, etc?

Who writes the rules about "public sphere"? If I donate to a cause that hopes to influence public policy, should I be doxxed? How much money? Does it depend on the cause I'm donating to?

If I buy a private jet and use it to fly around the world, people would have access to the same information as they do on Elon Musk. He wants the convenience of having his own jet, that comes with a cost.

Let's remove Elon Musk from this.

If I buy a [legal private means of transportation] to travel, people should be able to track my whereabouts.

Is this limited to private jets? How about private boats? Single engine airplanes? Or is there a price cap? Is a $50k plane allow you to maintain privacy? 100k? What's the cutoff? Should it be inflation adjusted?

I'm just trying to understand

My comment was about the known requirements for air travel. You have to register your flight and that information is available. He has other options that would more safely guarantee privacy. If the privacy of your travels is more important to you than the convenience of having a private plane available, then you choose another option.

> Is this limited to private jets? How about private boats? Single engine airplanes? Or is there a price cap? Is a $50k plane allow you to maintain privacy? 100k? What's the cutoff? Should it be inflation adjusted?

I recommend that you read this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loki%27s_Wager

One does not need to answer literally every single edge case or scenario, to answer other more obvious questions.

Elon Musk is a public figure. A random person driving a car is not. And everything in between is a spectrum, and we don't need to know the exact specific cutoff point to know the obvious answers here.

How about a spaceship?

Should spaceship flights be private? :)

You cannot remove Elon Musk from the discussion. He is a public figure[0]; the same discussion would not apply to you (I presume) or me (I know).

What exactly a 'public figure' is depends on the given legal system. But its pretty clear that is a public figure, by any definition. He's among the most wealthy (some might say; obscenely wealthy) persons on the planet and thus enjoys outrages amounts of social and political leverage.

Of course he doesn't enjoy the same rights to privacy as you and me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_figure

both civilian jets and big civilian boats are required to broadcast their position when under power, sometimes also when stationary.

so yeah. you can't buy that kind of privacy unless you want a nation state air force on your six, or some kind of a patrol boat in case of a yacht.

> So it would be okay to you to list the home address, movement and acquaintances of senators, congressmen, judges, etc?

Yeah probably. Publicly elected official is pretty up there on it being important to have transparency.

> If I donate to a cause that hopes to influence public policy, should I be doxxed?

No, you shouldn't.

> the rules about "public sphere"?

The rules are a spectrum. Someone can both believe that it is important for very large public figures to be transparent, and also believe that it goes to far to dox anyone who has donated 1$ to a political cause.

And there is no contradiction here. And if you are to imply that there is a contradiction, then you are engaging in Loki's fallacy.

No I don't know the exact specific point where someone becomes a public figure. But I do know that Elon Musk is a public figure, and a random person who donated 1$ to the ACLU is not a public figure.

Geunine question: is, or how, or where is that enshrined in law?

There's a long and healthy discussion about this question in many legal systems. The topic of discussion is the definition of 'public figure'[0] and what that entails. Public figures usually don't enjoy the same right to privacy as other persons.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_figure

Except it is already being broadcast, on hundreds of sites.

You can search for people on google and get literally all of their information. Address, phone number, job, family, friends, and anything else that is public knowledge. Presented in a very easy to read format.

Why should the wealthy be special? Just because they have the money to stop it? I didn't opt in to having my information packaged nicely and presented to anyone who cares to search for me.

It's inferred data only. Elons jet is required to publish ADS-B location beacons for air traffic control etc. Crowdsourced platforms like ads-b exchange collect and publish these public/unencrypted airplane gps beacons worldwide. You just need to know the jet's registration to look it up.

That's not 100% correct. Yes, the ADS-B data packets are out there in the public ether but for covering longer flights you need access to a network of receivers.

There are only a handful of ADS-B tracking networks out there. Most of them filter out certain airplanes if requested/paid by the owner (FR24, FlightAware). ElonJet exists solely at the mercy of ADSBExchange.com at this time.

> Do you not have a right to privacy if you're wealthy?

Interestingly, the courts have ruled that the ultra wealthy are "public figures" whether they act so or not, because of their "undue/oversized influence on public and social policy".

Just because you’re rich doesn’t mean you “have” to use your jet. You can charter another jet, fly first class, drive, any number of means of transit.

In fact, once you have a jet you can strategically use it to deceive your movements.

And maybe you can hire people to protect your garbage, I dunno.

I don’t disagree but I also don’t think there’s less sympathetic example on the entire planet to use than Mark Zuckerberg. He’s quite literally made his fortune exploiting the privacy of the rest of us. I’m certainly not going to lose any sleep over his privacy being violated.

His right to privacy isn't being violated by ElonsJet. The information being used is public knowledge.

Your license plate, criminal record, and any property you own is all publicly available. Do you care to share?

That information is of public interest, because Musk is a public figure that constantly talks about climate change.

I think that after certain threshold of wealth you're not quite human anymore and fair game. You definitely don't have much in common with 99.999% of others, and have effectively infinite resources to bend reality to your will. So yeah, eat the rich and all that.

I think there is a difference between "tracking somebody in your office" and using public information in a more efficient way.

> Do you not have a right to privacy if you're wealthy?

Not if you are deliberately aim to be a person of public interest.

Multi-Billionaires are persons of public interest by the power they wield given their wealth.

So; you probably don't have a right to privacy if you are as obscenely wealthy as Musk or Zuckerberg.

>How about [unpopular politician]?

Most of these people have public itineraries...

> Do you not have a right to privacy if you're wealthy?

No. You have a responsibility to be private, which can easily be neglected by underpaying the wrong people. C'est la vie!

Blame the FAA. ADSB data is stupidly simple to receive with an RTLSDR and a raspberry pi, and there are community sites where you can upload. Point being: his plane can be tracked as long as it’s flying legally with its beacon on. This wouldn’t be a problem if the FAA just pushed back harder on the FOIA request for his jet data, then it would just be another anonymous private jet in the system instead of Elons Jet.

FOIA wasn’t meant to make every record the government has public, it was meant to prevent the government from hiding things from the people. I can’t FOIA your social security number. I probably shouldn’t be able to FOIA the cell phone tracking data firehose that the FBI has, either. What I should be able to FOIA is the fact that the FBI has such a firehose.

I think the real harm @ElonsJet does to Elon Musk is not that his privacy is breached, if we learn where he's taking a plane a couple of times a week that's not exactly particularly intrusive[0]. It is that he is trying to position himself as the man who is directly tackling environmental issues by single-handedly bootstrapping an electric car company ... while frequently flying a private jet and having a carbon footprint thousands of times more than the average person.

If you're a public figure want to project a certain image of yourself, it hurts to be exposed as being the opposite of that.

[0] - not least because the source of the data is his own plane broadcasting its position

Reply on news.ycombinator.com