which was to shadownban-2.0 the account when needed to delay news of certain travel. he came up with the idea when we pointed out other smaller accounts started to post the info and we were considering flagging them as bot last week.
It's public information. Are you literally trying to ban the ADS system?
one thing is broadcasting personal information about a citizen, one is protecting a citizens right to object to actions by their government.
collecting public information is still doxxing. most doxxing involves only public information as it happens across the internet.
edit: a downvote is not a rebuttal, sorry, try again.
It is just an automobile after all, and vehicles aren't citizens...
Cue fallback argument.
EDIT: added clarification to distinguish between Tweeting coordinates and Onstar services.
The idea that posting publicly available information to Twitter transforms it is silly.
Whether you are finding someone's email, or real name, or jet location, or home address, and then announce it, you are doxxing them.
We used to have a thing called the phone book that put everyone's name, phone number, and address together in a book and sent it out. None of those is a piece of private information.
Publicly available location of Musk's private plane? Serious threat to human safety.
https://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/aircraft_certifica...
That does not sound unreasonable to me at all. In other words, the idea that some posts might warrant a delay for a range of issues or to allow for investigation. That, to me, again, sounds very sensible.
In the case of the travel plans of certain high-profile people, you know, with so many crazy folks out there, yes, sure, give the news enough of a delay so the person can safely get to their destination. The world doesn't need to know when Elon, Messi, Buttigieg, Oprah or David Letterman in real time unless they choose to disclose details.
I think calling someone an idiot is against HN policy...but, what do I know, I am obviously an idiot.
That said. OK, well, let's publish everyone's travel plans. Name, flight, seat, from/to, etc. Make the system 100% open to for anyone to see who is travelling, where and when.
You know, so folks profiting from breaking into homes while people are travelling can be more efficient in their scheduling.
In our neighborhood we've had a few cases of homes being burglarized when people travelled out of town and posted about it on Facebook. Lots of people are not aware that they might be posting to the entire universe. Those wonderful pictures of your vacation in Hawaii let smart crooks know you are not home in Los Angeles.
I am 100% certain everyone would be against their personal, family and business travel itineraries being posted in a publicly accessible website or database in real time. Understandably so. Why, then, is it to that this is OK for those who might be obvious targets of violence and other potentially negative outcomes?
One argument I saw in this thread is about not creating special rules for a small group of people. Fine with that. Let's publish everyone's travel plans then. Or, on the other hand, have the common sense to understand that personal safety is important to everyone and move to make posting such information illegal and protect everyone, no matter their station in life.
I get it that on HN there exist a subgroup of people who are millionaire/billionaire haters. Good for you! Enjoy the hatred. That group aside, once common sense enters the room, it is generally clear that privacy is good for everyone, regardless of who they might be.
As much as I dislike politicians, this should also extend to them. Yes, of course, their travel details should be released and made available for all to review. However, this can be done well after the fact.
Safety first. For everyone.
This is the definition of concern trolling on Elon's part, and you're carrying water for his bad faith arguments in favor of restricting the republishing of information that is free and open to the public by design. I don't think you even really understand the implications of what you're saying.
I don't understand hatred based on financial standing.
However, I do not think this is the real motivation in Musk's case. I can see people hating on Musk these days because he is uncovering just how deep and wide one political party has reached in the United States in order to control the media and messaging. Something that Putin and totalitarian regimes have done for ages in other nations has been achieved in the US by brainwashing people at universities and then asking them to restrict or reshape the message in favor of that ideology.
Anyone who does not think this is revolting and should not exist in the US should take a moment to imagine a scenario where the same level of indoctrination and control would be had by the other party. This would be just as revolting and just as undesirable. Universities should not be centers of indoctrination. Political parties should not have any control on what the public can and cannot hear. That's a formula for progress, not one where one or the other party can exercise ideological control.
> I don't think you even really understand the implications of what you're saying.
I don't think you have taken a single minute to explain what you think the implications might be.
Interestingly enough, I am arguing in favor of privacy/security for all. You seem to be saying that someone with money does not deserve it. Why?
But there is still an order of magnitude difference between Pelosi and the wealth of someone who can afford to own and fly their own superjet. That you don’t believe better security can be had does not mean it does not exist, it does.
I think you’re revealing your ideological biases. The Twitter files did not just contain information about censorship by the democrats. The Trump White House was also heavily implicated. That is not the partisan issue that you want it to be. Instead, perhaps the liberal ire towards Elon could come from the fact that he is catering towards the right?
As far as public safety goes, it’s ultimately moot. If you choose to own your own plane and fly it using public infrastructure paid for with US tax dollars, you have no expectation of that data being private. Reporting that data is protected by the first amendment, which of course doesn’t apply to posts on Twitter, a private company. Someone who wants privacy should choose to travel via other means, it’s really that simple. Flying via your own private jet is not a constitutionally protected right, it’s a privilege that is subject to the terms and regulations of the United States of America and it’s regulatory bodies. And arguing that we should change the rules for the ultra rich is an absolutely tyrannical prospect, lord knows we do it enough already.
Did you read about Musk's kid being stalked by someone who ended-up threatening him and jumping on the car?
How do you feel about that? It's OK because the guy is rich? C'mon.
> I think you’re revealing your ideological biases.
Happy to spell it out: I am a Classical Liberal. I detest what both Democrats and Republicans (the parties, not the drones who follow them blindly) have become. I also understand that the extreme left and right have cause more destruction around the world and across time than one could probably list.
Today, in the US, we are in the grips of the extreme left. And that's a problem. They tyranny, today, in the US, is coming from the left.
Our universities have become extreme left indoctrination centers. Our media is brutally dominated by the left. Our social media and internet companies, same (I forget the number, something like 96% to 98% of those employed by places like Twitter, FB and Google donated to the Democratic party?). Etc.
The narrative and the "news" people are exposed to is overwhelmingly controlled by leftist ideology. I have spoken to people who only watch networks like CNN. As an example, they have no clue whatsoever what is going on at our southern border, none at all.
This is a formula for disaster. And, yes, I would be saying exactly the same thing if the dominance belonged to the right. Neither one is good for a society. History has proven this time and time again.
I mean, the left claims to be for women's rights and the protectors of, well, just about everyone. And yet, we are having a human trafficking crisis at the southern border and EVERYONE on the left is ignoring all of it. In two years, nearly five million people have poured in. Millions of pills of the most dangerous drugs have been smuggled into the country. And human trafficking has grown by leaps and bounds. All we get from the administration is "the border is secure". Really?
This, BTW, is also a historical fact. The way the left works is to claim to solve the problems of all those who (they convince) are oppressed and make enemies of everyone else. If you study the history of pretty much every country in Latin America you will discover patterns that, today, might be familiar to all Americans. One of the problems in the US is that people are not educated well enough to know much about history. That's why this population is so easy to fool.
Look at the minimum wage mess. They promised $15 per hour would solve the problems of millions. This is how they bought these votes. And then gasoline goes from $2 per gallon to $5, $6, $7 per gallon; food prices go up 30% to 100% (our dog food alone doubled in cost). And more. Now $15 per hour is more like $5 per hour. And, on top of that, we let in five million people who will more than likely take minimum wage jobs away from the very people who were promised this new minimum wage would help them.
How much more of this nonsense is it going to take for people who support these politicians to understand they are being played for fools?
What is being uncovered at Twitter is important because the vast majority of Americans have been led to believe none of this was happening. The vast majority of Americans have been the subject of carefully engineered ideologically-driven shaping of the messages. Having the FBI interact at the level they have with Twitter staff (and likely FB and others) IS NOT GOOD FOR SOCIETY.
I always say the same thing: Imagine a scenario where the ideological right had this level of control over universities, social and traditional media. If you think that would be horrible, first, I agree, second, you should be incensed about the fact that the ideological left is in that position today. The fact that riots have broken out at universities when speakers with contrasting viewpoints are invited should have everyone take pause. Again, imagine if the roles were inverted before you opine.
> which of course doesn’t apply to posts on Twitter, a private company
Oh, please, what these people have done is criminal. If not criminal, immoral. If not immoral, unethical. If none of those, it is horrible and detrimental to any society. You don't build progress, harmony and tolerance this way. You build hatred, resentment and destroy a society from the inside-out.
Not sure what the laws, requirements or practices say about the entire universe knowing where any aircraft might be in real time. I mean, if a bad guy wanted to aim a SAM at any given aircraft and this data is live and real-time...
Again, I don't know how this works in terms of the law. Opinions don't matter. What's the law?
US civilian aviation rules require that an on-craft transponder emit altitude and location information so that other craft can avoid collisions. Obviously, this makes aircraft more vulnerable to surface to air missiles. Thankfully, that's a vanishingly remote threat, so the FAA has decided that valuing collision avoidance over missile evasion is the correct set of priorities. I don't know how this would work in situations where surface to air missiles are a real threat, but I would guess military aircraft only follow civilian rules when it doesn't compromise their mission.
As far as "the entire universe knowing," I think the relevant legal principle at play is that there's no expectation of privacy associated with flying a private aircraft (for the reasons stated above). Airpsace is a shared, national security-sensitive resource, civilian regulators get to set the rules governing use.
Expanding the concept beyond Elon, I personally don't like the idea of anyone being hounded by elements unknown just because of being famous. Do actors have the right to travel with their kids an not be mauled? I think they should have that right.
There seems to be this general idea these days that acting like a complete jerk and without one ounce of civility is now acceptable. Harass people at restaurants, threaten to hurt politicians and their families, stalk actors and celebrities, burn down entire business districts, etc. What the hell is wrong with people?
Well, that's not public information. Private jet owners can loan it out to friends (according to [0], Taylor Swift does this often), and you can't tell from flight plans who will be a passenger (or whether it will be carrying passengers at all).
Just like you dislike people being rude at restaurants, I object to billionaires trying to carve out new kinds of privacy to hide their excesses. Civilian use of the skies requires cooperation and is an act that occurs in public.
[0]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2022/08/0...