4 ms·

> It seems relevant that the most shocking story they could put together was about someone who found the AirTag and got a protection order against their stalker

> It seems relevant that the most shocking story they could put together was about someone who found the AirTag and got a protection order against their stalker. An AirTag has already been used to track down and murder someone: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2022/06/15/woman-airtag-track-boyfriend-death/7632348001/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2022/06/15/woman-...

lotsofpulp 4y ago
The AirTag was used to track someone. A vehicle was used to murder them. I might agree with the framing if it was more like a person was in witness security, and AirTags were used to discover their location and then execute an assassination.
- SadTrombone 4y ago
  > The AirTag was used to track someone. A vehicle was used to murder them. I don't think anyone who clicked the article (besides you perhaps) was expecting the AirTag to be the actual murder weapon. It's an indisputable fact that the killer used an AirTag to track and follow her victim to his destination and then murder him, I'm not quite sure why you're bringing up WitSec or "framing".
  - lotsofpulp 4y ago
    Because the wording makes it seem like the murderer used the AirTag with the motive to murder. If the girlfriend had used the AirTag to track the boyfriend and found him planning a surprise party for her or something, then the AirTag served the same role, which makes the AirTag superfluous to the murder part of this story. Edit: another way of putting it is if the girlfriend simply followed the boyfriend’s car, the end result was the same. But an article would not have been written titled “Woman used a vehicle to track boyfriend, then ran over and killed him, police say”
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - SadTrombone 4y ago
      The problem with tailing your boyfriend in your car is that your boyfriend tends to notice you tailing him in your car, since he knows what you and your car look like. Using an AirTag completely negates that. It's a lot easier to tail someone without being caught when you can wait for them to reach their final destination and just go straight there instead without ever being visible to the victim. If you're unwilling to even acknowledge that tracking someone via AirTag is much simpler versus physically tailing them around town then we're just wasting time here.
      - lotsofpulp 4y ago
        > If you're unwilling to even acknowledge that tracking someone via AirTag is much simpler versus physically tailing them around town then we're just wasting time here. I specifically acknowledged the AirTag was used to track, and obviously it makes tracking easier. I objected to the notion that an AirTag was involved in the murder, since it was not premeditated.
    - sokoloff 4y ago
      That is some Olympic-level mental gymnastics to argue that just because other, much more difficult, ways to track someone exist, that a tracking device played no part in making that particular sequence of events (including the crime of murder) easier to commit.
      - lotsofpulp 4y ago
        I did not write an AirTag played no part. I wrote that the AirTag was superfluous to the murder, just like using a car to drive to the bar was superfluous to the murder.
- thefz 4y ago
  Ah, yes. I imagine if you read "killed with a handgun" you'll go out replying "actually, killed by a bullet"
  - lotsofpulp 4y ago
    Context is important. The point of writing “the car was used to murder someone” was to show that in this story, it was just as nonsensical to claim the AirTag was used to murder someone. samatman: It seems relevant that the most shocking story they could put together was about someone who found the AirTag and got a protection order against their stalker. SadTrombone then links to what they think is a more shocking story because the AirTags were presumably part of a plan to murder someone. Me: points out that SadTrombone’s story is not more shocking because the AirTag was used to track, or stalk, but not as part of a plan to murder someone, as was insinuated. I think the original story of a stalker stalking an ex is more shocking than someone stalking their girlfriend/boyfriend to verify if they are cheating. Most people would simply break up at this point, but that this girlfriend became enraged enough to cause violence or kill is unrelated to AirTags.

lotsofpulp 4y ago

The AirTag was used to track someone. A vehicle was used to murder them. I might agree with the framing if it was more like a person was in witness security, and AirTags were used to discover their location and then execute an assassination.

SadTrombone 4y ago
> The AirTag was used to track someone. A vehicle was used to murder them. I don't think anyone who clicked the article (besides you perhaps) was expecting the AirTag to be the actual murder weapon. It's an indisputable fact that the killer used an AirTag to track and follow her victim to his destination and then murder him, I'm not quite sure why you're bringing up WitSec or "framing".
- lotsofpulp 4y ago
  Because the wording makes it seem like the murderer used the AirTag with the motive to murder. If the girlfriend had used the AirTag to track the boyfriend and found him planning a surprise party for her or something, then the AirTag served the same role, which makes the AirTag superfluous to the murder part of this story. Edit: another way of putting it is if the girlfriend simply followed the boyfriend’s car, the end result was the same. But an article would not have been written titled “Woman used a vehicle to track boyfriend, then ran over and killed him, police say”
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - SadTrombone 4y ago
    The problem with tailing your boyfriend in your car is that your boyfriend tends to notice you tailing him in your car, since he knows what you and your car look like. Using an AirTag completely negates that. It's a lot easier to tail someone without being caught when you can wait for them to reach their final destination and just go straight there instead without ever being visible to the victim. If you're unwilling to even acknowledge that tracking someone via AirTag is much simpler versus physically tailing them around town then we're just wasting time here.
    - lotsofpulp 4y ago
      > If you're unwilling to even acknowledge that tracking someone via AirTag is much simpler versus physically tailing them around town then we're just wasting time here. I specifically acknowledged the AirTag was used to track, and obviously it makes tracking easier. I objected to the notion that an AirTag was involved in the murder, since it was not premeditated.
  - sokoloff 4y ago
    That is some Olympic-level mental gymnastics to argue that just because other, much more difficult, ways to track someone exist, that a tracking device played no part in making that particular sequence of events (including the crime of murder) easier to commit.
    - lotsofpulp 4y ago
      I did not write an AirTag played no part. I wrote that the AirTag was superfluous to the murder, just like using a car to drive to the bar was superfluous to the murder.
thefz 4y ago
Ah, yes. I imagine if you read "killed with a handgun" you'll go out replying "actually, killed by a bullet"
- lotsofpulp 4y ago
  Context is important. The point of writing “the car was used to murder someone” was to show that in this story, it was just as nonsensical to claim the AirTag was used to murder someone. samatman: It seems relevant that the most shocking story they could put together was about someone who found the AirTag and got a protection order against their stalker. SadTrombone then links to what they think is a more shocking story because the AirTags were presumably part of a plan to murder someone. Me: points out that SadTrombone’s story is not more shocking because the AirTag was used to track, or stalk, but not as part of a plan to murder someone, as was insinuated. I think the original story of a stalker stalking an ex is more shocking than someone stalking their girlfriend/boyfriend to verify if they are cheating. Most people would simply break up at this point, but that this girlfriend became enraged enough to cause violence or kill is unrelated to AirTags.